From the Journals

New studies inform best practices for pelvic organ prolapse


 

FROM JAMA

Studies challenge current prolapse protocols

The study by Dr. Rahn and colleagues contradicts the common clinical practice of preoperative vaginal estrogen to reduce recurrence of prolapse, wrote Charles W. Nager, MD, of the University of California San Diego Health, La Jolla, in an accompanying editorial that addressed both studies.

University of California San Diego Health, La Jolla University of California San Diego Health

Dr. Charles W. Nager

The results suggest that use of perioperative intravaginal estrogen had no impact on outcomes, “despite the surgeon assessment of less atrophy and better vaginal apex tissue in the estrogen group,” he noted. Although vaginal estrogen has other benefits in terms of patient symptoms and effects on the vaginal epithelium, “surgeons should not prescribe vaginal estrogen with the expectation that it will improve surgical success.”

The study by Dr. Enklaar and colleagues reflects the growing interest in uterine-conserving procedures, Dr. Nager wrote. The modified Manchester procedure conforms to professional society guidelines, and the composite outcome conforms to current standards for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.

Although suspension of the vaginal apex was quite successful, the researchers interpreted their noninferiority findings with caution, said Dr. Nager. However, they suggested that the modified Manchester procedure as performed in their study “has a role in modern prolapse surgical repair for women with uterine descent that does not protrude beyond the hymen.”

The vaginal estrogen study was supported by the National Institute on Aging, a Bridge Award from the American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology and the American Association of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Foundation. Dr. Rahn disclosed grants from the National Institute on Aging, the American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology, and the AAOGF bridge award, as well as nonfinancial support from National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences and Pfizer during the study. The uterine prolapse study was supported by the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose. Dr. Nager had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Pages

Recommended Reading

Pelvic floor dysfunction imaging: New guidelines provide recommendations
MDedge Family Medicine
Women with recurrent UTIs express fear, frustration
MDedge Family Medicine
Transvaginal mesh, native tissue repair have similar outcomes in 3-year trial
MDedge Family Medicine
Surgeons may underestimate recovery from incontinence operation
MDedge Family Medicine
Is yoga the answer to pelvic floor woes?
MDedge Family Medicine
Findings question value of pessary for pelvic organ prolapse
MDedge Family Medicine
Little evidence to support lasers for ‘vaginal rejuvenation’
MDedge Family Medicine
Wireless neurostimulation safe for urge incontinence
MDedge Family Medicine
Best practices document outlines genitourinary applications of lasers and energy-based devices
MDedge Family Medicine
Vulvodynia: A little-known and treatable condition
MDedge Family Medicine