Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Posterior repair versus no posterior repair for posterior vaginal wall prolapse resolved under simulated apical support at the time of native tissue apical suspension

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of an adjuvant posterior repair (PR) on treatment outcomes of native tissue apical suspension.

Materials and methods

This retrospective cohort study included 194 women who underwent iliococcygeus or uterosacral ligament suspension with or without PR for Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POPQ) stage 2–4 posterior vaginal wall prolapse that resolved under simulated preoperative apical support and who completed a 1-year follow-up. The primary outcome was composite surgical failure defined as the presence of vaginal bulge symptoms, descent of the vaginal apex more than one-third of the way into the vaginal canal (apical recurrence), anterior or posterior vaginal wall descent beyond the hymen (anterior or posterior recurrence), or retreatment for prolapse. Secondary outcomes included anatomical outcomes, perioperative outcomes, obstructed defecation, dyspareunia, and adverse events.

Results

One hundred thirty women underwent concomitant PR, and 64 did not. Surgical failure rates were significantly higher in the group not receiving PR than in the group receiving PR (29.7% vs. 12.3%, p < 0.01). Anatomically, anterior and apical recurrence was more common in the group not receiving PR (p < 0.05). Concomitant PR was associated with a longer operating time and more blood loss (p < 0.01). However, there were few adverse events related to PR, and the rates of de novo obstructed defecation and dyspareunia were low in both groups, with no significant difference between the groups.

Conclusion

Concomitant PR at the time of native tissue apical suspension may reduce the recurrence of symptomatic anterior and apical prolapse without significant morbidity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Suskind AM, Jin C, Walter LC, Finlayson E. Frailty and the role of obliterative versus reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse: a National Study. J Urol. 2017;197(6):1502–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.12.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Haya N, Baessler K, Christmann-Schmid C, de Tayrac R, Dietz V, Guldberg R, et al. Prolapse and continence surgery in countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in 2012. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212(6):755e751–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.02.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Dallenbach P. To mesh or not to mesh: a review of pelvic organ reconstructive surgery. Int J Women's Health. 2015;7:331–43. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S71236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Rooney K, Kenton K, Mueller ER, FitzGerald MP, Brubaker L. Advanced anterior vaginal wall prolapse is highly correlated with apical prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195(6):1837–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2006.06.065.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Summers A, Winkel LA, Hussain HK, DeLancey JO. The relationship between anterior and apical compartment support. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194(5):1438–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2006.01.057.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Chen L, Ashton-Miller JA, Hsu Y, DeLancey JO. Interaction among apical support, levator ani impairment, and anterior vaginal wall prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108(2):324–32. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000227786.69257.a8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Hsu Y, Chen L, Summers A, Ashton-Miller JA, DeLancey JO. Anterior vaginal wall length and degree of anterior compartment prolapse seen on dynamic MRI. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19(1):137–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-007-0405-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lowder JL, Park AJ, Ellison R, Ghetti C, Moalli P, Zyczynski H, et al. The role of apical vaginal support in the appearance of anterior and posterior vaginal prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(1):152–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000297309.25091.a0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Eilber KS, Alperin M, Khan A, Wu N, Pashos CL, Clemens JQ, et al. Outcomes of vaginal prolapse surgery among female Medicare beneficiaries: the role of apical support. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(5):981–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182a8a5e4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lee SY, Jeon MJ. Anterior repair versus no anterior repair for anterior vaginal wall prolapse resolved under simulated apical support at the time of uterosacral ligament suspension. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31(10):2043–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-020-04229-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Yoo EH, Jeon MJ, Ahn KH, Bai SW. Translation and linguistic validation of Korean version of short form of pelvic floor distress inventory-20, pelvic floor impact questionnaire-7. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2013;56(5):330–2. https://doi.org/10.5468/ogs.2013.56.5.330.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Yoo EH, Jeon MJ, Ahn KH, Bai SW. Translation and linguistic validation of Korean version of short form of PISQ (pelvic organ prolapse and incontinence sexual questionnaire). Kor J Urogynecol. 2012;14:42–7.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(1):10–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9378(96)70243-0.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Suh DH, Jeon MJ. Risk factors for the failure of iliococcygeus suspension for uterine prolapse. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018;225:210–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.05.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Chang OH, Davidson ERW, Thomas TN, Paraiso MFR, Ferrando CA. Does concurrent posterior repair for an asymptomatic rectocele reduce the risk of surgical failure in patients undergoing sacrocolpopexy? Int Urogynecol J. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-020-04268-7.

  16. Bradley CS, Brown MB, Cundiff GW, Goode PS, Kenton KS, Nygaard IE, et al. Bowel symptoms in women planning surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195(6):1814–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2006.07.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Grimes CL, Lukacz ES, Gantz MG, Warren LK, Brubaker L, Zyczynski HM, et al. What happens to the posterior compartment and bowel symptoms after sacrocolpopexy? Evaluation of 5-year outcomes from E-CARE. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2014;20(5):261–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000085.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Arunachalam D, Hale DS, Heit MH. Posterior compartment surgery provides no differential benefit for Defecatory symptoms before or after concomitant mesh-augmented apical suspension. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2018;24(2):183–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000538.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sutkin G, Zyczynski HM, Sridhar A, Jelovsek JE, Rardin CR, Mazloomdoost D, et al. Association between adjuvant posterior repair and success of native tissue apical suspension. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;222(2):161e161–161 e168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2019.08.024.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Sammarco AG, Nandikanti L, Kobernik EK, Xie B, Jankowski A, Swenson CW, et al. Interactions among pelvic organ protrusion, levator ani descent, and hiatal enlargement in women with and without prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(5):614e611–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.07.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Vaughan MH, Siddiqui NY, Newcomb LK, Weidner AC, Kawasaki A, Visco AG, et al. Surgical alteration of genital Hiatus size and anatomic failure after vaginal vault suspension. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131(6):1137–44. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002593.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kahn MA, Stanton SL. Posterior colporrhaphy: its effects on bowel and sexual function. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104(1):82–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb10654.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Antosh DD, Iglesia CB, Vora S, Sokol AI. Outcome assessment with blinded versus unblinded POP-Q exams. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205(5):489e481–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2011.07.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Johnson P, Larson KA, Hsu Y, Fenner DE, Morgan D, Delancey JO. Self-reported natural history of recurrent prolapse among women presenting to a tertiary care center. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2013;120(1):53–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2012.07.024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea

    Sumin Oh, Seohyun Choi, So Yeon Lee & Myung Jae Jeon

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 103 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, South Korea

    Myung Jae Jeon

Authors
  1. Sumin Oh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Seohyun Choi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. So Yeon Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Myung Jae Jeon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Myung Jae Jeon.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Conference presentation

The Annual Meeting of the Korean Urogynecologic Society, Seoul, South Korea, 11 October, 2020

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Oh, S., Choi, S., Lee, S.Y. et al. Posterior repair versus no posterior repair for posterior vaginal wall prolapse resolved under simulated apical support at the time of native tissue apical suspension. Int Urogynecol J 32, 2203–2209 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-021-04728-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-021-04728-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation