Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The investigator aimed to compare various pelvic floor repairs in female aged from 70 to 80 years old, to see which procedure in terms of treatment-related complications of SCP, VMR and NTR by comparing the operative and functional outcomes in this patient population.
Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a global health care issue that could have a significant impact on pelvic floor function and quality of life (QOL), while seldom having the potential to be life-threatening. Prevalence of POP increases with age. In women older than 80, 11% undergo a surgical procedure. The incidence of degenerative diseases and multiple co-morbidities increases with age, and advanced age is also associated with an increase in morbidity generally for gynecologic procedures. Furthermore, greater comorbidity beforehand can predispose patients to postoperative complications such as bleeding, hematoma, pain, infectious. As a result hospital stays are longer and the surgical results are compromised.
Surgical techniques should optimize functional results and minimize complications. In POP surgery, younger women are good candidates for sacrocolpopexy (SCP), because of the improved long term functional result, while women older than 80 may have a satisfactory outcome with fewer complication with a vaginal repair with mesh (VMR) or native tissue (NTR). The increasing prevalence of POP, and the increasing population of women aged 70-80 requires an evaluation of the appropriate surgical management since women in this age group may be candidates for all types of surgical repair.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | Sacrocolpopexy (SCP) |
| |
| Group 2 | Native tissue repair surgery (NTR) |
| |
| Group 3 | Vaginal mesh repair surgery (VMR) |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SCP | Procedure | Sacrocolpopexy (SCP) aims to secure the anterior vaginal wall, the uterus more or less the posterior vaginal wall using polypropylene prostheses and to secure them to the presacral ligament to restore the patient's anatomical features and improve pelvic symptoms |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Post-operative complications | All complications are recorded, corresponding to Clavien Dindo classification. | 12 months follow-up |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Anatomical success rate | Assessed by recovery time and anatomical correction | 12 months follow-up |
| Surgical satisfaction | Assessed by the validated Surgical Satisfaction Questionnaire (SSQ-8) |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
The study cohort is selected from our institution. The study involves elderly females over 70 years old with advanced pelvic organ prolapse.
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 9988790 | Background | Samuelsson EC, Victor FT, Tibblin G, Svardsudd 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 Feb;180(2 Pt 1):299-305. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(99)70203-6. | |
| 21592280 | Background | Gomelsky A, Penson DF, Dmochowski RR. Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery: the evidence for the repairs. BJU Int. 2011 Jun;107(11):1704-19. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10123.x. |
Not provided
Not provided
CFU, Publication at the European Journal in February 2018
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D056887 | Pelvic Organ Prolapse |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D011391 | Prolapse |
| D020763 | Pathological Conditions, Anatomical |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| NTR | Procedure | Native tissue repair surgery (NTR) consist of site-specific surgical repair of the existing defect (anterior and/or posterior) using non-absorbable sutures. Specifically, anterior and/or posterior colporrhaphy for cystocele and rectocele respectively after adequate hydrodissection of the vesicovaginal or rectovaginal space. |
|
| VMR | Procedure | Vaginal mesh repair surgery (VMR) is performed using a single-incision mesh system. A single vertical incision is made in the anterior and/or posterior vaginal wall. A full-thickness dissection is performed laterally and apically to the ischial spine. |
|
| 12 months follow-up |
| 7791257 | Background | Williams-Russo P, Sharrock NE, Mattis S, Szatrowski TP, Charlson ME. Cognitive effects after epidural vs general anesthesia in older adults. A randomized trial. JAMA. 1995 Jul 5;274(1):44-50. |
| 11408873 | Background | Luber KM, Boero S, Choe JY. The demographics of pelvic floor disorders: current observations and future projections. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Jun;184(7):1496-501; discussion 1501-3. doi: 10.1067/mob.2001.114868. |
| 15902169 | Background | Stepp KJ, Barber MD, Yoo EH, Whiteside JL, Paraiso MF, Walters MD. Incidence of perioperative complications of urogynecologic surgery in elderly women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 May;192(5):1630-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.11.026. |
| 11205702 | Background | Tabata T, Yamawaki T, Ida M, Nishimura K, Nose Y, Yabana T. Clinical value of dilatation and curettage for abnormal uterine bleeding. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2001 Jan;264(4):174-6. doi: 10.1007/s004040000100. |
| 19333610 | Background | Hornemann A, Kamischke A, Luedders DW, Beyer DA, Diedrich K, Bohlmann MK. Advanced age is a risk factor for higher grade perineal lacerations during delivery in nulliparous women. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010 Jan;281(1):59-64. doi: 10.1007/s00404-009-1063-7. Epub 2009 Mar 31. |
| 20089111 | Background | Sabbagh R, Mandron E, Piussan J, Brychaert PE, Tu le M. Long-term anatomical and functional results of laparoscopic promontofixation for pelvic organ prolapse. BJU Int. 2010 Sep;106(6):861-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09173.x. Epub 2010 Jan 19. |
| 18423726 | Background | Gerten KA, Markland AD, Lloyd LK, Richter HE. Prolapse and incontinence surgery in older women. J Urol. 2008 Jun;179(6):2111-8. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.01.089. |
| 12851759 | Background | Visco AG, Wei JT, McClure LA, Handa VL, Nygaard IE; Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. Effects of examination technique modifications on pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) results. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2003 Jun;14(2):136-40. doi: 10.1007/s00192-002-1030-3. Epub 2003 Mar 28. |
| 9588065 | Background | Giuly J, Cravello L, D'Ercole C, Roger V, Porcu G, Blanc B. [Richter's spinofixation in vaginal prolapse]. Chirurgie. 1997;122(7):430-4. French. |
| 15273542 | Background | Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae. |
| 18455537 | Background | Murphy M, Sternschuss G, Haff R, van Raalte H, Saltz S, Lucente V. Quality of life and surgical satisfaction after vaginal reconstructive vs obliterative surgery for the treatment of advanced pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 May;198(5):573.e1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.12.036. |
| 28479877 | Background | King SW, Jefferis H, Jackson S, Marfin AG, Price N. Laparoscopic uterovaginal prolapse surgery in the elderly: feasibility and outcomes. Gynecol Surg. 2017;14(1):2. doi: 10.1186/s10397-017-1000-x. Epub 2017 Apr 11. |
| 16647926 | Background | Sung VW, Weitzen S, Sokol ER, Rardin CR, Myers DL. Effect of patient age on increasing morbidity and mortality following urogynecologic surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006 May;194(5):1411-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2006.01.050. |
| 11555070 | Background | Leung JM, Dzankic S. Relative importance of preoperative health status versus intraoperative factors in predicting postoperative adverse outcomes in geriatric surgical patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001 Aug;49(8):1080-5. doi: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2001.49212.x. |
| 27696355 | Background | Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Christmann-Schmid C, Haya N, Brown J. Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Oct 1;10(10):CD012376. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012376. |
| 11118174 | Background | Rodgers A, Walker N, Schug S, McKee A, Kehlet H, van Zundert A, Sage D, Futter M, Saville G, Clark T, MacMahon S. Reduction of postoperative mortality and morbidity with epidural or spinal anaesthesia: results from overview of randomised trials. BMJ. 2000 Dec 16;321(7275):1493. doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7275.1493. |
| 23473899 | Background | Greer JA, Northington GM, Harvie HS, Segal S, Johnson JC, Arya LA. Functional status and postoperative morbidity in older women with prolapse. J Urol. 2013 Sep;190(3):948-52. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.03.004. Epub 2013 Mar 6. |
| 19201521 | Background | Ganatra AM, Rozet F, Sanchez-Salas R, Barret E, Galiano M, Cathelineau X, Vallancien G. The current status of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a review. Eur Urol. 2009 May;55(5):1089-103. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.01.048. Epub 2009 Feb 4. |
| 22626575 | Background | Keys T, Campeau L, Badlani G. Synthetic mesh in the surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse: current status and future directions. Urology. 2012 Aug;80(2):237-43. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2012.04.008. Epub 2012 May 23. |
| 16324871 | Background | Belot F, Collinet P, Debodinance P, Ha Duc E, Lucot JP, Cosson M. [Risk factors for prosthesis exposure in treatment of genital prolapse via the vaginal approach]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2005 Dec;33(12):970-4. doi: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2005.10.023. French. |
| 21306698 | Background | Maher CF, Feiner B, DeCuyper EM, Nichlos CJ, Hickey KV, O'Rourke P. Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy versus total vaginal mesh for vaginal vault prolapse: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Apr;204(4):360.e1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.11.016. |
| 17848318 | Background | Agarwala N, Hasiak N, Shade M. Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy with Gynemesh as graft material--experience and results. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2007 Sep-Oct;14(5):577-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2007.03.005. |
| 24469775 | Background | Su TH, Lau HH, Huang WC, Hsieh CH, Chang RC, Su CH. Single-incision mesh repair versus traditional native tissue repair for pelvic organ prolapse: results of a cohort study. Int Urogynecol J. 2014 Jul;25(7):901-8. doi: 10.1007/s00192-013-2294-5. Epub 2014 Jan 28. |
| 20494332 | Background | Nieminen K, Hiltunen R, Takala T, Heiskanen E, Merikari M, Niemi K, Heinonen PK. Outcomes after anterior vaginal wall repair with mesh: a randomized, controlled trial with a 3 year follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Sep;203(3):235.e1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.03.030. Epub 2010 May 21. |
| 19710939 | Background | Moore RD, Miklos JR. Vaginal repair of cystocele with anterior wall mesh via transobturator route: efficacy and complications with up to 3-year followup. Adv Urol. 2009;2009:743831. doi: 10.1155/2009/743831. Epub 2009 Aug 24. |
| 22617056 | Background | Lee U, Wolff EM, Kobashi KC. Native tissue repairs in anterior vaginal prolapse surgery: examining definitions of surgical success in the mesh era. Curr Opin Urol. 2012 Jul;22(4):265-70. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e32835459bb. |
| 30788571 | Derived | Tibi B, Vincens E, Durand M, Bentellis I, Salet-Lizee D, Kane A, Gadonneix P, Severac F, Ahallal Y, Chevallier D, Villet R. Comparison of different surgical techniques for pelvic floor repair in elderly women: a multi-institutional study. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019 Apr;299(4):1007-1013. doi: 10.1007/s00404-019-05076-1. Epub 2019 Feb 20. |