Are older patients with prolapse likely to continue pessary use? A retrospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To review the outcomes and complications of vaginal prolapse management with pessaries in women aged 75 years or older, to ascertain whether pessaries are providing satisfactory long-term outcomes for older women. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was performed on women aged 75 years or older presenting to a tertiary Urogynaecology service with vaginal prolapse who opted for management with a vaginal pessary. Demographic and clinical data were collected by reviewing clinical files. The primary outcome was the proportion of women who opted for pessary management who later required prolapse surgery. Secondary outcomes included pessary complications and risk factors for failure. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were performed to analyse pessary failure. RESULTS: Of the 218 women who presented with prolapse, 78% opted for pessary management, and pessary fitting was successful in 84%. Sixty-nine percent of women who opted for initial pessary management underwent surgery later, with a mean time from pessary insertion to surgery of 21.6 months. Vaginal erosions were reported in 42% of pessary users. Risk factors for pessary failure were younger age and previous history of hysterectomy or prolapse surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Although vaginal pessary use was the preferred first-line management choice for vaginal prolapse in most older women, surgery for prolapse was ultimately required in two-thirds of those conservatively managed. As three-quarters of older women presenting with prolapse had surgery as either a primary or secondary procedure; patients need to be advised of the high chance of requiring surgery at a later stage if they opt for pessary management.

International Urogynecological Consultation: clinical definition of pelvic organ prolapse.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: This segment of Chapter 1 of the International Urogynecology Consultation (IUC) on pelvic organ prolapse (POP) reviews the literature on the clinical definition of POP with the intent of creating standard terminology. METHODS: An international group containing nine urogynecologists and one university-based medical librarian performed a search of the literature using pre-specified search terms in PubMed, Embase, and Scopus. Publications were eliminated if not relevant to the clinical definition of POP, and those articles remaining were evaluated for quality using the Specialist Unit for Review Evidence (SURE). The resulting list of articles was used to inform a comprehensive review and creation of the clinical definition of POP. RESULTS: The original search yielded 31,931 references, of which 167 were used by the writing group. Ultimately, 78 are referenced in the manuscript. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical definition of POP for this review of the literature is: "anatomical prolapse with descent of at least one of the vaginal walls to or beyond the vaginal hymen with maximal Valsalva effort WITH the presence either of bothersome characteristic symptoms, most commonly the sensation of vaginal bulge, or of functional or medical compromise due to prolapse without symptom bother."

Long-term effectiveness and safety of open Burch colposuspension vs retropubic midurethral sling for stress urinary incontinence-results from a large comparative study.

BACKGROUND: There are few adequately powered long-term trials comparing midurethral sling and Burch colposuspension. Recent concerns about synthetic mesh with new stringent clinical and research governance support the need for evidence to facilitate shared decision making. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare long-term outcomes of open Burch colposuspension with the retropubic midurethral sling. STUDY DESIGN: A matched cohort study of 1344 women with urodynamic stress incontinence (without intrinsic sphincter deficiency) who underwent surgery for stress urinary incontinence. Women had either open Burch colposuspension or the retropubic midurethral sling, from January 2000 to June 2018, in a tertiary center. Follow-up was by chart review and one-time phone follow-up until 2019, using a dedicated database. Primary outcomes were the presence or absence of stress urinary incontinence on follow-up, the success of index surgery based on response to validated questionnaires of patient-reported outcomes, and retreatment rates. Secondary outcomes are described below. Matching (1:3) was done at baseline to avoid confounding. RESULTS: The study included 1344 women who had either Burch colposuspension (336) or retropubic midurethral sling (1008). Mean follow-up was 13.1 years for Burch colposuspension and 10.1 years for retropubic midurethral sling. In the Burch colposuspension group, 83.0% of patients (279 of 336) reported no ongoing stress urinary incontinence at the time of the latest follow-up vs 85.0% (857 of 1008) in the retropubic midurethral sling group (P=.38). Success in terms of the latest reported International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form (defined as International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form score of ≤6) where these data were available were similar within both groups: 76.0% (158 of 208 where this was available) in Burch colposuspension vs 72.1% (437 of 606 where this was available) in retropubic midurethral sling (P=.32). Where this information was available, success defined by a Patient Global Impression of Improvement of "very much improved" and "much improved" was similar between Burch colposuspension and retropubic midurethral sling groups (84.1% [243 of 289] vs 82.0% [651 of 794]; P=.88). Where data were available, 88.1% of women (178 of 202) in the Burch colposuspension group said they were very likely to recommend the surgery to family or a friend vs 85.0% (580 of 682) in retropubic midurethral sling (P=.30).Overall, 3.6% needed repeat incontinence procedures (13 in Burch colposuspension group [3.8%] vs 35 in retropubic midurethral sling group [3.5%]; P=.73). The incidence of mesh exposure was 1.0 %. Notably, 1 Burch colposuspension patient had a suture in the bladder during follow-up; 5 patients have reported long-standing pain across the study population. Overall, 51 women reported new-onset overactive bladder symptoms on follow-up: 10 of 336 (3.0%) had Burch colposuspension and 41 of 1008 (4.1%) had retropubic midurethral sling (P=.41). The need for future prolapse surgery per index procedure was 3.3% after Burch colposuspension vs 1.1% postretropubic midurethral sling (P=.01). Moreover, 9 of the 11 patients who needed a prolapse repair after Burch colposuspension required a posterior repair. The incidence of long-term severe voiding difficulty needing self-catheterization was similar in both groups (0.3% in Burch colposuspension and 0.5 % in retropubic midurethral sling group; P=1.00). CONCLUSION: This study shows no difference in success, patient satisfaction, or complications between Burch colposuspension and retropubic midurethral sling, although the risk of posterior compartment prolapse operations after Burch colposuspension is increased. Reoperation rates for incontinence were similar in both groups. Chronic pain was a rare outcome.

Impact of severe obesity on long-term success and complications of the retropubic midurethral sling.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: With conflicting evidence in the literature, we hypothesised that the long-term subjective outcomes of the retropubic midurethral sling (MUS) are the same in the severely obese and non-obese populations. METHODS: A retrospective matched cohort study was performed on women with a BMI ≥ 35 and < 30 who had a retropubic MUS placed between 2010 and 2015 using telephone questionnaires. The primary outcome was the success rate of surgery defined by the Urogenital Distress Inventory Short Form (UDI-6) stress subscale. Statistical analysis was performed to test for associations between primary and secondary outcomes across the two groups. RESULTS: Seventy-eight severely obese (SOG) and 74 non-obese (NOG) were recruited. At a median time from surgery of 3.8 years the success rate was 47.4% in the SOG compared to 64.9% in the NOG (p = 0.03). There was a 22% reduction in the odds of success with every 5 unit increase in BMI (p = 0.03). There were higher rates of mixed urinary incontinence preoperatively (60.3% vs. 37.8%, p = 0.006) and persistent urinary urge incontinence postoperatively (48.7% vs. 32.4% p = 0.04) in the severely obese. Lower PGI-I scores were obtained in the severely obese group indicating less improvement in symptoms from surgery. There was no difference in complication rates between the groups. CONCLUSION: Long-term subjective outcomes from the retropubic MUS are lower in severely obese women than in non-obese women with no difference in complication rates. High satisfaction and recommendation rates were found in both groups.

Video of uterovaginal procidentia repair incorporating a high extraperitoneal uterosacral vault suspension.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Women with high-grade uterovaginal prolapse have a higher incidence of levator injury, larger levator hiatal defects, and are at a greater risk of recurrent prolapse after pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery. RCOG guidelines have recommended prophylactic sacrospinous suspension at the time of vaginal hysterectomy, whenever there is a marked uterovaginal prolapse. The aim of the video is to describe our surgical approach at the time of surgery for advanced POP, and describe the technique for modified McCall high extraperitoneal vault suspension. METHODS: We have modified the McCall culdoplasty by extending the dissection of the middle portion of the uterosacral/cardinal ligaments so that the sutures can be placed higher and more laterally extraperitoneally to re-support the vaginal cuff at the time of a vaginal hysterectomy. RESULTS: The video highlights the surgical technique used for apical support at the time of surgery for advanced POP. CONCLUSIONS: This video demonstrates our modified McCall technique for vault suspension at the time of vaginal surgery for advanced POP. This technique could be considered an alternative technique to other modes of apical support.

Lightweight transvaginal mesh is associated with lower mesh exposure rates than heavyweight mesh.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: There has been a scarcity of long-term published data comparing lightweight versus heavier weight transvaginal mesh for prolapse repair. The aim was to ascertain the long-term rates of recurrent prolapse and mesh exposure in a cohort of vaginal repairs utilizing two different weights of transvaginal mesh. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected on all mesh-augmented vaginal prolapse repairs performed with Apogee® or Perigee® mesh kits (IntePro® or IntePro Lite®) at a single centre over an 11-year period, with patients receiving ongoing annual follow-up. A sequential stepwise univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to identify variables that were significantly associated with mesh exposure. RESULTS: Eighty-eight women with 113 mesh kits were reviewed from the original cohort of 158 women. The median length of follow-up was 6.4 years (range 1.1-12.5 years). Mesh exposure rate per implant in the IntePro® group was 16/40 (40%) versus 4/73 (5.5%) in the IntePro Lite® group (p < 0.0001). A hazard ratio of 4.2 was identified for mesh exposure for IntePro® versus IntePro Lite® (95% CI 3.0-6.8). There was no difference in rates of recurrent prolapse between the heavy- and lightweight mesh groups. CONCLUSIONS: Lightweight transvaginal mesh is associated with lower mesh exposure rates than heavyweight mesh at a median follow-up of 6.4 years, with no difference in rates of recurrent prolapse.