Prospective evaluation of outcome of vaginal pessaries versus surgery in women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS:

The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of pessaries and surgery in women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse.

METHODS:

A total of 554 women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP) were recruited and treated with either a vaginal pessary (n = 359) or surgery (n = 195). Using the validated Sheffield POP questionnaire, outcomes were evaluated and then compared at 1 year.

RESULTS:

At 1 year, the only significant difference between the two groups was increased frequency of intercourse in the surgery group (54% vs 46%; p = 0.028), which was not significant when controlled for age. There was a statistically significant improvement in prolapse, urinary, bowel, and sexual function in both pessary users and those treated surgically.

CONCLUSIONS:

One year after treatment, women with POP report similar improvement in urinary, bowel, sexual function, and quality of life parameters when treated with pessary or surgical correction.

• Authors: Zeelha Abdool, Ranee Thakar, Abdul H Sultan, Reeba S Oliver
• Journal: International urogynecology journal (Int Urogynecol J) Vol. 22 Issue 3 Pg. 273-8 (Mar 2011) ISSN: 1433-3023 [Electronic] England
• PMID: 21161179 (Publication Type: Comparative Study, Evaluation Study, Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't)

Topics

• Coitus (physiology)
• Defecation (physiology)
• Female
• Follow-Up Studies
• Gynecologic Surgical Procedures
• Health Surveys
• Humans
• Longitudinal Studies
• Pelvic Organ Prolapse (physiopathology, therapy)
• Pessaries
• Prospective Studies
• Quality of Life
• Retrospective Studies
• Treatment Outcome
• Urination (physiology)