TY - JOUR
T1 - Patient Impression of Improvement 1 year After Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy in Women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Stage 2 or Higher
AU - Stoter, Lisa M
AU - Notten, Kim J B
AU - Claas, Marieke
AU - Tijsseling, Deodata
AU - Ruefli, Maud
AU - van den Tillaart, Femke
AU - van Kuijk, Sander M J
AU - Milani, Alfredo L
AU - Kluivers, Kristin B
PY - 2024/5
Y1 - 2024/5
N2 - INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Patient-reported outcomes are relevant outcomes in studies on pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery, as anatomical recurrence alone does not have a significant correlation with perceived improvement. In the present study, the patient's impression of improvement after 1 year is studied after vaginal hysterectomy (VH) versus sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH) in large cohorts from daily clinical practice. We hypothesize that there is no difference between the groups. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis on prospectively collected data in a multicenter cohort of patients who underwent VH or SSH for symptomatic POP. All patients had a POP-Q stage?=?2 in at least one compartment at baseline and were treated with VH or SSH between 2002 and 2019. The primary outcome was the patient-reported score on the patient global impression of improvement index (PGI-I) 1 year after surgery. The secondary outcome was a composite outcome of surgical success, defined as the absence of recurrent POP beyond the hymen with bothersome bulge symptoms and/or repeat surgery. RESULTS: A total of 378 women (196 VH and 182 SSH) were included. The median score on the PGI-I did not differ between VH and SSH. At 1 year post-operatively, 77 women after VH (73%) and 77 women after SSH (75%) considered their condition (very) much improved (p?=?0.86). There was no difference in composite outcome of surgical success (126 out of 137 women [92%] after VH, 118 out of 125 women [94%] after SSH; p?=?0.44). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that there was no difference in the type of surgery, VH or SSH, with regard to the patient's impression of improvement 1 year postoperatively in a large cohort from daily clinical practice.
AB - INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Patient-reported outcomes are relevant outcomes in studies on pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery, as anatomical recurrence alone does not have a significant correlation with perceived improvement. In the present study, the patient's impression of improvement after 1 year is studied after vaginal hysterectomy (VH) versus sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH) in large cohorts from daily clinical practice. We hypothesize that there is no difference between the groups. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis on prospectively collected data in a multicenter cohort of patients who underwent VH or SSH for symptomatic POP. All patients had a POP-Q stage?=?2 in at least one compartment at baseline and were treated with VH or SSH between 2002 and 2019. The primary outcome was the patient-reported score on the patient global impression of improvement index (PGI-I) 1 year after surgery. The secondary outcome was a composite outcome of surgical success, defined as the absence of recurrent POP beyond the hymen with bothersome bulge symptoms and/or repeat surgery. RESULTS: A total of 378 women (196 VH and 182 SSH) were included. The median score on the PGI-I did not differ between VH and SSH. At 1 year post-operatively, 77 women after VH (73%) and 77 women after SSH (75%) considered their condition (very) much improved (p?=?0.86). There was no difference in composite outcome of surgical success (126 out of 137 women [92%] after VH, 118 out of 125 women [94%] after SSH; p?=?0.44). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that there was no difference in the type of surgery, VH or SSH, with regard to the patient's impression of improvement 1 year postoperatively in a large cohort from daily clinical practice.
KW - Apical prolapse
KW - POP-Q
KW - Patient’s impression of improvement
KW - Prolapse recurrence
KW - Sacrospinous hysteropexy
KW - Vaginal hysterectomy
U2 - 10.1007/s00192-024-05750-2
DO - 10.1007/s00192-024-05750-2
M3 - Article
SN - 0937-3462
VL - 35
SP - 985
EP - 993
JO - International Urogynecology Journal
JF - International Urogynecology Journal
IS - 5
ER -