International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 28, Issue 12, pp 1833–1839 | Cite as

Preoperative quality of life questionnaires are an adequate tool to select women with genital prolapse for laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy

  • Enora Laas
  • Mattieu Haddad
  • Joël Muhlstein
  • Sofiane Bendifallah
  • Marcos Ballester
  • Emile DaraiEmail author
Original Article


Introduction and hypothesis

No clear consensus exists on the selection of patients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) for surgery. There is a need to preoperatively identify candidates who will benefit from surgery as there is no strict correlation between POP anatomical abnormalities and changes in symptoms and quality of life (QOL) after surgical treatment. Therefore, our objectives were to evaluate the changes in QOL after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) for POP using validated questionnaires and to assess their relevance in selecting women for surgery.


This was a prospective study of 48 women with advanced stages of POP treated by LSC from March 2005 to January 2015. We developed a recursive partitioning model from QOL PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 questionnaire scores to determine a preoperative cut-off score for predicting improvement after surgery. The model was then validated in 84 consecutive women.


Optimal anatomical results were obtained in 129 of the 132 women (97.7%). Both questionnaires revealed a significant improvement after LSC (p < 0.01). The probability of improvement after surgery was 0% in women with a preoperative PFIQ-7 score of <45.25, and 84% in women with a PFIQ-7 score of ≥45.25. The probability of improvement after surgery was 0% in women with a preoperative PFDI-20 score of <52.15, 88.2% in those with a PFDI-20 score of ≥ 98.45, and 42.9% in those with a PFDI-20 score between 52.15 and 98.45. In the validation set, the discriminatory accuracies of the model were 0.96 (95% CI 0.925–0.998) and 0.75 (95% CI 0.64–0.85) for the PFIQ-7 and PFDI-20 questionnaires, respectively. The performance was accurate with a significant difference between observed outcome frequencies and predicted probabilities (p = 1).


Our results support the use QOL questionnaires to select women for LSC.


Pelvic genital prolapse surgery Quality of life questionnaires Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy PDFI-20 PFIQ-7 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest



  1. 1.
    Digesu GA, Chaliha C, Khullar V, et al. The relationship of urethral resistance pressure and pressure flow parameters in women with lower urinary tract symptoms. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007;18:493–7. doi: 10.1007/s00192-006-0181-z.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Samuelsson EC, Victor FT, Tibblin G, Svärdsudd KF. Signs of genital prolapse in a Swedish population of women 20 to 59 years of age and possible related factors. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180:299–305.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Swift S, Woodman P, O’Boyle A, et al. Pelvic organ support study (POSST): the distribution, clinical definition, and epidemiologic condition of pelvic organ support defects. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:795–806. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.10.602.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Farouk El Sayed R. The urogynecological side of pelvic floor MRI: the clinician’s needs and the radiologist’s role. Abdom Imaging. 2013;38:912–29. doi: 10.1007/s00261-012-9905-3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beck RP, McCormick S, Nordstrom L. A 25-year experience with 519 anterior colporrhaphy procedures. Obstet Gynecol. 1991;78:1011–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fialkow MF, Newton KM, Weiss NS. Incidence of recurrent pelvic organ prolapse 10 years following primary surgical management: a retrospective cohort study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19:1483–7. doi: 10.1007/s00192-008-0678-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chan SSC, Cheung RYK, Yiu KW, et al. Symptoms, quality of life, and factors affecting women’s treatment decisions regarding pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23:1027–33. doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-1698-y.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fritel X, Varnoux N, Zins M, et al. Symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse at midlife, quality of life, and risk factors. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113:609–16. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181985312.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jelovsek JE, Barber MD. Women seeking treatment for advanced pelvic organ prolapse have decreased body image and quality of life. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194:1455–61. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2006.01.060.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lakeman MME, Zijta FM, Peringa J, et al. Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging to quantify pelvic organ prolapse: reliability of assessment and correlation with clinical findings and pelvic floor symptoms. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23:1547–54. doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-1772-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    de Boer TA, Gietelink DA, Vierhout ME. Discrepancies between physician interview and a patient self-assessment questionnaire after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19:1349–52. doi: 10.1007/s00192-008-0656-1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    de Tayrac R, Deval B, Fernandez H, et al. Development of a linguistically validated French version of two short-form, condition-specific quality of life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7). J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod. 2007;36:738–48. doi: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2007.08.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Barber MD, Walters MD, Bump RC. Short forms of two condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193:103–13. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.12.025.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Barber MD, Kuchibhatla MN, Pieper CF, Bump RC. Psychometric evaluation of 2 comprehensive condition-specific quality of life instruments for women with pelvic floor disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185:1388–95. doi: 10.1067/mob.2001.118659.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rogers RG, Coates KW, Kammerer-Doak D, et al. A short form of the pelvic organ Prolapse/urinary incontinence sexual questionnaire (PISQ-12). Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2003;14:164–168; discussion 168. doi: 10.1007/s00192-003-1063-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Letouzey V, Mercier G, Adjoussou S, et al. Can the PFDI (Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory) or PFIQ (Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaires) be used to predict outcome in pelvic reconstructive surgery? Prog Urol. 2013;23:940–5. doi: 10.1016/j.purol.2013.04.010.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bui C, Ballester M, Chéreau E, et al. Functional results and quality of life of laparoscopic promontofixation in the cure of genital prolapse. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2010;38:563–8. doi: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2010.06.001.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chauvin C, Chéreau E, Ballester M, Daraï E. Potential relevance of pre-operative quality of life questionnaires to identify candidates for surgical treatment of genital prolapse: a pilot study. BMC Urol. 2012;12:9. doi: 10.1186/1471-2490-12-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bø K, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175:10–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chan CMY, Liang HHX, Go WW, et al. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for uterine and post-hysterectomy prolapse: anatomical and functional outcomes. Hong Kong Med J. 2011;17:301–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gadonneix P, Ercoli A, Salet-Lizée D, et al. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with two separate meshes along the anterior and posterior vaginal walls for multicompartment pelvic organ prolapse. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2004;11:29–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Seror J, Yates DR, Seringe E, et al. Prospective comparison of short-term functional outcomes obtained after pure laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. World J Urol. 2012;30:393–8. doi: 10.1007/s00345-011-0748-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ganatra AM, Rozet F, Sanchez-Salas R, et al. The current status of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a review. Eur Urol. 2009;55:1089–103. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.01.048.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Helström L, Nilsson B. Impact of vaginal surgery on sexuality and quality of life in women with urinary incontinence or genital descensus. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2005;84:79–84. doi: 10.1111/j.0001-6349.2005.00668.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Weber AM, Walters MD, Piedmonte MR. Sexual function and vaginal anatomy in women before and after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182:1610–5. doi: 10.1067/mob.2000.107436.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, et al. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010:CD004014. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004014.pub4.
  27. 27.
    Barber MD, Amundsen CL, Paraiso MFR, et al. Quality of life after surgery for genital prolapse in elderly women: obliterative and reconstructive surgery. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007;18:799–806. doi: 10.1007/s00192-006-0240-5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sergent F, Resch B, Loisel C, et al. Mid-term outcome of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with anterior and posterior polyester mesh for treatment of genito-urinary prolapse. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2011;156:217–22. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2011.01.022.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Scarlato A, Souza CCC, Fonseca ESM, et al. Validation, reliability, and responsiveness of Prolapse Quality of Life Questionnaire (P-QOL) in a Brazilian population. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22:751–5. doi: 10.1007/s00192-010-1354-3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Dubernard G, Rouzier R, David-Montefiore E, et al. Use of the SF-36 questionnaire to predict quality-of-life improvement after laparoscopic colorectal resection for endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:846–51. doi: 10.1093/humrep/den026.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Christmann-Schmid C, Haya N, Brown J. Surgery for women with anterior compartment prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;11:CD004014.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecological Association 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Enora Laas
    • 1
  • Mattieu Haddad
    • 1
  • Joël Muhlstein
    • 1
  • Sofiane Bendifallah
    • 1
    • 2
  • Marcos Ballester
    • 1
    • 3
  • Emile Darai
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynaecologyTenon University Hospital, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), University Pierre and Marie Curie, et ParisParisFrance
  2. 2.INSERM UMR S 707, Epidemiology, Information Systems, ModelingUniversity Pierre and Marie CurieParisFrance
  3. 3.INSERM, UMR S 938University Pierre et Marie CurieParisFrance

Personalised recommendations