Skip to main content

Native Tissue Repairs for Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Current Urology Reports volume 18, Article number: 6 (2017) Cite this article

Abstract

Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a generalized term that refers to prolapse of any of the three vaginal compartments: anterior (cystocele), posterior (rectocele), and apical (uterine and vault prolapse). POP may affect up to 50% of parous women, and as a result, one in nine women will undergo at least one surgery for POP in her lifetime. Native tissue repair is the cornerstone of prolapse surgery, especially in light of the scrutiny placed on the use of mesh for prolapse. Refinements in the procedures over time have been based on both basic anatomy and fundamentals of surgery, as well as the ongoing acquisition of new knowledge through clinical studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Wein AJ, Kavoussi LR, Campbell MF, Walsh PC. Campbell-Walsh urology. 10th ed.

  2. Sung VW, Washington B, Raker CA. Costs of ambulatory care related to female pelvic floor disorders in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(5):483 e1–4. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2010.01.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Barber MD, Maher C. Epidemiology and outcome assessment of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(11):1783–90. doi:10.1007/s00192-013-2169-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mant J, Painter R, Vessey M. Epidemiology of genital prolapse: observations from the Oxford family planning association study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104(5):579–85.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Larsson C, Kallen K, Andolf E. Cesarean section and risk of pelvic organ prolapse: a nested case-control study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200(3):243 e1–4. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2008.11.028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Lukacz ES, Lawrence JM, Contreras R, Nager CW, Luber KM. Parity, mode of delivery, and pelvic floor disorders. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(6):1253–60. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000218096.54169.34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Swift S, Woodman P, O'Boyle A, Kahn M, Valley M, Bland D, 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(3):795–806. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2004.10.602.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kudish BI, Iglesia CB, Sokol RJ, Cochrane B, Richter HE, Larson J, et al. Effect of weight change on natural history of pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113(1):81–8. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e318190a0dd.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89(4):501–6. doi:10.1016/S0029-7844(97)00058-6.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Nguyen JN, Burchette RJ. Outcome after anterior vaginal prolapse repair: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(4):891–8. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e31816a2489.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. FDA Public Health Notification. Serious complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh in repair of pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. 2008. http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/safety/102008-surgicalmesh.html.

  12. FDA Safety Communication. UPDATE on serious complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. 2011.

  13. White GR. Cystocele--a radical cure by suturing lateral sulci of the vagina to the white line of pelvic fascia. 1909. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 1997;8(5):288–92.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kelly HA, Dumm WM. Urinary incontinence in women, without manifest injury to the bladder. 1914. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 1998;9(3):158–64.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Richardson AC, Lyon JB, Williams NL. A new look at pelvic relaxation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1976;126(5):568–73.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Weber AM, Walters MD. Anterior vaginal prolapse: review of anatomy and techniques of surgical repair. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89(2):311–8. doi:10.1016/S0029-7844(96)00322-5.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Delancey JO. Fascial and muscular abnormalities in women with urethral hypermobility and anterior vaginal wall prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187(1):93–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hsu Y, DeLancey J. Functional anatomy and pathophysiology of pelvic organ prolapse. In Female Urology; 2008. p. 542–555.

  19. Weber AM, Walters MD, Piedmonte MR, Ballard LA. Anterior colporrhaphy: a randomized trial of three surgical techniques. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185(6):1299–304. discussion 304-6 doi:10.1067/mob.2001.119081.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. • Lavelle RS, Christie AL, Alhalabi F, Zimmern PE. Risk of prolapse recurrence after native tissue anterior vaginal suspension procedure with intermediate to long-term Followup. J Urol. 2016;195(4P1):1014–20. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2015.10.138. Established that modifited vaginal paravaginal repair can lead to significantly improved cystocele repair outcomes.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. •• 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. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182a8a5e4. Published further data supporting the utility to apical repair with cystocele repair to further decrease cystocele recurrence rates.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Zebede S, Smith AL, Lefevre R, Aguilar VC, Davila GW. Reattachment of the endopelvic fascia to the apex during anterior colporrhaphy: does the type of suture matter? Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(1):141–5. doi:10.1007/s00192-012-1862-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bergman I, Soderberg MW, Kjaeldgaard A, Ek M. Does the choice of suture material matter in anterior and posterior colporrhaphy? Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(9):1357–65. doi:10.1007/s00192-016-2981-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Song HS, Choo GY, Jin LH, Yoon SM, Lee T. Transvaginal cystocele repair by purse-string technique reinforced with three simple sutures: surgical technique and results. International neurourology journal. 2012;16(3):144–8. doi:10.5213/inj.2012.16.3.144.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Cormio L, Mancini V, Liuzzi G, Lucarelli G, Carrieri G. Cystocele repair by autologous rectus fascia graft: the Pubovaginal cystocele sling. J Urol. 2015;194(3):721–7. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2015.03.104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Chinthakanan O, Miklos JR, Moore RD. Laparoscopic paravaginal defect repair: surgical technique and a literature review. Surgical technology international. 2015;27:173–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Demirci F, Ozdemir I, Somunkiran A, Gul OK, Gul B, Doyran GD. Abdominal paravaginal defect repair in the treatment of paravaginal defect and urodynamic stress incontinence. Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology : the journal of the Institute of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2007;27(6):601–4. doi:10.1080/01443610701497603.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mallipeddi P, Kohli N, Steele AC, Owens RG, Karram MM. Vaginal paravaginal repair in the surgical treatment of anterior vaginal wall prolapse. Primary care update for Ob/Gyns. 1998;5(4):199–200.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Young SB, Daman JJ, Bony LG. Vaginal paravaginal repair: one-year outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185(6):1360–6. discussion 6-7 doi:10.1067/mob.2001.119073.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hosni MM, El-Feky AE, Agur WI, Khater EM. Evaluation of three different surgical approaches in repairing paravaginal support defects: a comparative trial. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013;288(6):1341–8. doi:10.1007/s00404-013-2927-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Richardson AC. The rectovaginal septum revisited: its relationship to rectocele and its importance in rectocele repair. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1993;36(4):976–83.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Nichols DH. Posterior colporrhaphy and perineorrhaphy: separate and distinct operations. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991;164(3):714–21.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Madsen LD, Nussler E, Kesmodel US, Greisen S, Bek KM, Glavind-Kristensen M. Native-tissue repair of isolated primary rectocele compared with nonabsorbable mesh: patient-reported outcomes. Int Urogynecol J. 2016; doi:10.1007/s00192-016-3072-y.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Maher CF, Qatawneh AM, Baessler K, Schluter PJ. Midline rectovaginal fascial plication for repair of rectocele and obstructed defecation. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(4):685–9. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000139833.48063.03.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. •• Mellgren A, Anzen B, Nilsson BY, Johansson C, Dolk A, Gillgren P, et al. Results of rectocele repair. A prospective study. Dis Colon rectum. 1995;38(1):7–13. Established the utlity and efficacy of transvaginal rectocele repair, excellent short and long term efficacy rates.

  36. Porter WE, Steele A, Walsh P, Kohli N, Karram MM. The anatomic and functional outcomes of defect-specific rectocele repairs. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;181(6):1353–8. discussion 8-9

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Abramov Y, Gandhi S, Goldberg RP, Botros SM, Kwon C, Sand PK. Site-specific rectocele repair compared with standard posterior colporrhaphy. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105(2):314–8. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000151990.08019.30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Roman H, Michot F. Long-term outcomes of transanal rectocele repair. Dis Colon rectum. 2005;48(3):510–7.

  39. Nieminen K, Hiltunen KM, Laitinen J, Oksala J, Heinonen PK. Transanal or vaginal approach to rectocele repair: a prospective, randomized pilot study. Dis Colon rectum. 2004;47(10):1636–42.

  40. Haylen BT, Naidoo S, Kerr SJ, Yong CH, Birrell W. Posterior vaginal compartment repairs: where are the main anatomical defects? Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(5):741–5. doi:10.1007/s00192-015-2874-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Kanter G, Jeppson PC, McGuire BL, Rogers RG. Perineorrhaphy: commonly performed yet poorly understood. A survey of surgeons. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(12):1797–801. doi:10.1007/s00192-015-2762-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Shaw D, Lefebvre G, Bouchard C, Shapiro J, Blake J, Allen L, et al. Female genital cosmetic surgery. Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada: JOGC = Journal d'obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada: JOGC. 2013;35(12):1108–14.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Committee on Gynecologic Practice ACoO, Gynecologists. ACOG Committee opinion no. 378: vaginal “rejuvenation” and cosmetic vaginal procedures. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110(3):737–8. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000263927.82639.9b.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten U, et al. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the standardisation sub-committee of the international continence society. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002;21(2):167–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Uzoma A, Farag KA. Vaginal vault prolapse. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2009;2009:275621. doi:10.1155/2009/275621.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Winters JC, Cespedes RD, Vanlangendonck R. Abdominal sacral colpopexy and abdominal enterocele repair in the management of vaginal vault prolapse. Urology. 2000;56(6 Suppl 1):55–63.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Aigmueller T, Dungl A, Hinterholzer S, Geiss I, Riss P. An estimation of the frequency of surgery for posthysterectomy vault prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21(3):299–302. doi:10.1007/s00192-009-1033-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Paraiso MF, Falcone T, Walters MD. Laparoscopic surgery for enterocele, vaginal apex prolapse and rectocele. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 1999;10(4):223–9.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Ow LL, Walsh CE, Rajamaheswari N, Dwyer PL. Technique of extraperitoneal uterosacral ligament suspension for apical suspension. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(4):637–9. doi:10.1007/s00192-015-2873-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Karram M, Goldwasser S, Kleeman S, Steele A, Vassallo B, Walsh P. High uterosacral vaginal vault suspension with fascial reconstruction for vaginal repair of enterocele and vaginal vault prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185(6):1339–42. discussion 42-3 doi:10.1067/mob.2001.119077.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Shull BL, Bachofen C, Coates KW, Kuehl TJ. A transvaginal approach to repair of apical and other associated sites of pelvic organ prolapse with uterosacral ligaments. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;183(6):1365–73. discussion 73-4 doi:10.1067/mob.2000.110910.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Turner LC, Lavelle ES, Shepherd JP. Comparison of complications and prolapse recurrence between laparoscopic and vaginal uterosacral ligament suspension for the treatment of vaginal prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(5):797–803. doi:10.1007/s00192-015-2897-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Barbier HM, Smith MZ, Eto CU, Welgoss JA, Von Pechmann W, Horbach N, et al. Ureteral compromise in laparoscopic versus vaginal uterosacral ligament suspension: a retrospective cohort. Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery. 2015;21(6):363–8. doi:10.1097/SPV.0000000000000202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Vaudano G, Gatti M. Correction of vaginal vault prolapse using Capio suture capturing device: our experience. Minerva Ginecol. 2015;67(2):103–11.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Karram M, Walters MD. Surgical treatment of vaginal vault prolapse and enterocele. Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier; 2007. p. 271.

  56. • Barber MD, Brubaker L, Burgio KL, Richter HE, Nygaard I, Weidner AC, et al. Comparison of 2 transvaginal surgical approaches and perioperative behavioral therapy for apical vaginal prolapse: the OPTIMAL randomized trial. JAMA. 2014;311(10):1023–34. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.1719. Concluded that no difference exists in either efficacy or complication rates between USLS and SSLS.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Sze EH, Karram MM. Transvaginal repair of vault prolapse: a review. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89(3):466–75. doi:10.1016/S0029-7844(96)00337-7.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Serati M, Braga A, Bogani G, Leone Roberti Maggiore U, Sorice P, Ghezzi F, et al. Iliococcygeus fixation for the treatment of apical vaginal prolapse: efficacy and safety at 5 years of follow-up. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(7):1007–12. doi:10.1007/s00192-015-2629-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Milani R, Cesana MC, Spelzini F, Sicuri M, Manodoro S, Fruscio R. Iliococcygeus fixation or abdominal sacral colpopexy for the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse: a retrospective cohort study. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25(2):279–84. doi:10.1007/s00192-013-2216-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Schmid C. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2013;4:CD004014. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004014.pub5.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Abraham N, Quirouet A, Goldman HB. Transabdominal sacrocolpopexy with autologous rectus fascia graft. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(8):1273–5. doi:10.1007/s00192-016-2987-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Latini JM, Brown JA, Kreder KJ. Abdominal sacral colpopexy using autologous fascia lata. J Urol. 2004;171(3):1176–9. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000103925.56765.bc.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Culligan PJ, Blackwell L, Goldsmith LJ, Graham CA, Rogers A, Heit MH. A randomized controlled trial comparing fascia lata and synthetic mesh for sacral colpopexy. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106(1):29–37. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000165824.62167.c1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Nygaard I, Brubaker L, Zyczynski HM, Cundiff G, Richter H, Gantz M, et al. Long-term outcomes following abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. JAMA. 2013;309(19):2016–24. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.4919.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Maloney JC, Dunton CJ, Smith K. Repair of vaginal vault prolapse with abdominal sacropexy. The Journal of reproductive medicine. 1990;35(1):6–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Tate SB, Blackwell L, Lorenz DJ, Steptoe MM, Culligan PJ. Randomized trial of fascia lata and polypropylene mesh for abdominal sacrocolpopexy: 5-year follow-up. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22(2):137–43. doi:10.1007/s00192-010-1249-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Api M, Kayatas S, Boza A. Spondylodiscitis following sacral colpopexy procedure: is it an infection or graft rejection? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015;194:43–8. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2015.08.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Feng TS, Thum DJ, Anger JT, Eilber KS. Sacral osteomyelitis after robotic sacrocolpopexy. Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery. 2016;22(1):e6–7. doi:10.1097/SPV.0000000000000219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Margulies RU, Rogers MA, Morgan DM. Outcomes of transvaginal uterosacral ligament suspension: systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(2):124–34. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2009.07.052.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Gutman R, Maher C. Uterine-preserving POP surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(11):1803–13. doi:10.1007/s00192-013-2171-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Glavind K, Kempf L. Colpectomy or Le fort colpocleisis--a good option in selected elderly patients. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2005;16(1):48–51. discussion doi:10.1007/s00192-004-1218-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Krissi H, Aviram A, Eitan R, From A, Wiznitzer A, Peled Y. Risk factors for recurrence after Le fort colpocleisis for severe pelvic organ prolapse in elderly women. Int J Surg. 2015;20:75–9. doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.06.026.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Dietz V, van der Vaart CH, van der Graaf Y, Heintz P, Schraffordt Koops SE. One-year follow-up after sacrospinous hysteropexy and vaginal hysterectomy for uterine descent: a randomized study. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21(2):209–16. doi:10.1007/s00192-009-1014-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Carramao S, Auge AP, Pacetta AM, Duarte E, Ayrosa P, Lemos NL, et al. A randomized comparison of two vaginal procedures for the treatment of uterine prolapse using polypropylene mesh: hysteropexy versus hysterectomy. Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes. 2009;36(1):65–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Christmann-Schmid C, Haya N, Marjoribanks J. Transvaginal mesh or grafts compared with native tissue repair for vaginal prolapse. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2016;2:CD012079. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD012079.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Urology Resident, Cedars-Sinai Health System, 8631 West 3rd Street, Suite 930E, Los Angeles, CA, 90048, USA

    Justin Houman

  2. David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, 10833 Le Conte Ave, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA

    James M. Weinberger

  3. Cedars-Sinai Health System, 99 North La Cienega Blvd., Suite 307, Beverly Hills, CA, 90211, USA

    Karyn S. Eilber

Authors
  1. Justin Houman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James M. Weinberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Karyn S. Eilber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karyn S. Eilber.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Justin Houman and James M. Weinberger each declare no potential conflicts of interest. Karyn S. Eilber is an investigator for Boston Scientific.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Female Urology

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Houman, J., Weinberger, J.M. & Eilber, K.S. Native Tissue Repairs for Pelvic Organ Prolapse. Curr Urol Rep 18, 6 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-017-0648-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-017-0648-0

Keywords

  • Pelvic organ prolapse
  • Native tissue repair
  • Cystocele
  • Anterior colporrhaphy
  • Rectocele
  • Posterior colporrhaphy