Advertisement

International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 27, Issue 2, pp 287–290 | Cite as

A review of the pelvic organ prolapse quantification system in China

  • Yi-ting Wang
  • Jun-ying Jiang
  • Jin-song Han
Original Article

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Unified staging systems for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) have been established. We examined the application of the POP quantification (POP-Q) system in China by examining its use in scientific journal articles.

Methods

Relevant articles were identified by searching the Sinomed database using the terms: uterus prolapse, cystocele, proctocele, prolapse, and pelvic floor; limited to Chinese core journals in obstetrics and gynecology, from January 2004 to December 2014. We analyzed systems for grading POP severity and the adoption of POP-Q in different article categories and hospitals of different levels. For the last decade, with two 5-year groups (2005–2009; 2010–2014), the χ2 test was used to evaluate inter-group differences.

Results

In a total of 429 articles, 331 included a staging system, 70.7% of which used POP-Q. The POP-Q system first appeared in 2004 in China, was reported in 50% of articles in 2007, and its highest use occurred in 2012 (89.5%). In 234 POP-Q system-utilizing reports, operative treatment and basic research accounted for 73.1% and 14.0% respectively. POP-Q usage increased from 2005–2009 to 2010–2014 in surgery-related articles (54.2% vs 85.2%; P = 0.000). The proportion of reports using POP-Q in level I, II, and III hospitals was 20.0%, 35.4%, and 77.8% respectively.

Conclusions

The POP-Q system, first used in 2004 in China, is now the most commonly used grading system, with surgery reports and level III hospitals accounting for the largest proportion of POP-Q applications.

Keywords

Prolapse Pelvic organ prolapse POP-Q 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The present work was supported by Peking University Third Hospital (PUTH) Seed Funding (No. Y82504-01)

Conflicts of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Sen J, Yingkuan S, Xiaokun T (1984) Uterus and urinary fistula, 1st edn. People’s Medical Publishing House (PMPH), BeijingGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bø K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JOL, Klarskov P, Shull BL, Smith ARB (1996) The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:10–17CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baden WF, Walker TA (1972) Genesis of the vaginal profile: a correlated classification of vaginal relaxation. Clin Obstet Gynecol 15:1048–1054CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Scotti RJ, Flora R, Greston WM, Budnick L, Hutchinson-Colas J (2000) Characterizing and reporting pelvic floor defects: the revised New York classification system. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 11:48–60CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Julin TM (1998) Physical examination and pretreatment testing of the incontinent woman. Clin Obstet and Gynecol 41:663–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Muir TW, Stepp KJ, Barber MD (2003) Adoption of the pelvic organ prolapse quantification system in peer-reviewed literature. Am J Obstet Gynecol 189:1632–1635CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lu Y (2004) Treatment and prevent the prolapse of vagina apex by vaginal hysterectomy with SSLF. Chin J Obstet Gynecol 39:627–628Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Treszezamsky AD, Filmar G, Panagopoulos G, Vardy MD, Ascher-Walsh CJ (2012) Teaching of pelvic organ prolapse quantification system among obstetrics/gynecology and urology residents in the United States. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 18:37–40CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jie L (2005) Gynecology and obstetrics, 6th edn. People’s Medical Publishing House (PMPH), BeijingGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oz H (2014) POP-Q 2.0: its time has come! Int Urogynecol J 25:447–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Riss P, Dwyer PL (2014) The POP-Q classification system: looking back and looking forward. Int Urogynecol J 25:439–440CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Toozs-Hobson P (2014) POP-Q stage I prolapse: is it time to alter our terminology. Int Urogynecol J 25:445–446CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bump RC (2014) The POP-Q system: two decades of progress and debate. Int Urogynecol J 25:441–443CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecological Association 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Peking University Third Hospital Haidian districtBeijingChina
  2. 2.Fujian Maternity and Children Health HospitalFuzhouChina

Personalised recommendations