Patient Impression of Improvement 1 year After Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy in Women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Stage 2 or Higher
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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | International Urogynecology Journal 2024-05, Vol.35 (5), p.985-993 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 993 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 985 |
container_title | International Urogynecology Journal |
container_volume | 35 |
creator | Stoter, Lisa M. Notten, Kim J. B. Claas, Marieke Tijsseling, Deodata Ruefli, Maud van den Tillaart, Femke van Kuijk, Sander M. J. Milani, Alfredo L. Kluivers, Kristin B. |
description | 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. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00192-024-05750-2 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11150182</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3064412316</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-3feaafa98c94c548f6edb90ae47568d79cbadc17811069e77486115c1659fd883</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhi0EokPhBVggS2zYBI4vuXiFqqowlSp1pEJZWh7PScZVEgc7M5BH4W1xOkO5LFhZPv_v7_icn5CXDN4ygPJdBGCKZ8BlBnmZQ8YfkQWTQmQCuHhMFqBEmQlZ8BPyLMY7AJCQw1NyIirJCpbnC_JjZUaH_UgvuyFgjM731Nf3N7_HblYYndAEelaPGOiNscHHwfV-F-lyiqnmB_w-0VsMMZVuTeN60x4ltKPvJup6-sUnFv3mxi1dYbt3ll6HxvR0FXxrhoj0ZjQNUk59oEvXbDE8J09q00Z8cTxPyecPF5_Ol9nV9cfL87OrzMoyHzNRozG1UZVV0uayqgvcrBUYTGpRbUpl12ZjWVkxBoXCspRVwVhuWZGrelNV4pS8P3CH3brDjU0jB9PqIbjOhEl74_TfSu-2uvF7zRIGWMUT4c2REPzXHcZRdy5abFvTY1qT5kpwJUHks_X1P9Y7vwtpYVELKKRkXLAiufjBNe86BqwffsNAz9HrQ_Q6Ra_vo9cz-tWfczw8-ZV1MoiDISapbzD87v0f7E9-37xq</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3064412316</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Patient Impression of Improvement 1 year After Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy in Women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Stage 2 or Higher</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Stoter, Lisa M. ; Notten, Kim J. B. ; Claas, Marieke ; Tijsseling, Deodata ; Ruefli, Maud ; van den Tillaart, Femke ; van Kuijk, Sander M. J. ; Milani, Alfredo L. ; Kluivers, Kristin B.</creator><creatorcontrib>Stoter, Lisa M. ; Notten, Kim J. B. ; Claas, Marieke ; Tijsseling, Deodata ; Ruefli, Maud ; van den Tillaart, Femke ; van Kuijk, Sander M. J. ; Milani, Alfredo L. ; Kluivers, Kristin B.</creatorcontrib><description>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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0937-3462</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1433-3023</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1433-3023</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00192-024-05750-2</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38416155</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Aged ; Clinical medicine ; Female ; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures - methods ; Gynecology ; Humans ; Hysterectomy ; Hysterectomy, Vaginal - methods ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Original ; Original Article ; Patient Reported Outcome Measures ; Pelvic organ prolapse ; Pelvic Organ Prolapse - surgery ; Prospective Studies ; Severity of Illness Index ; Surgery ; Surgical outcomes ; Treatment Outcome ; Urology</subject><ispartof>International Urogynecology Journal, 2024-05, Vol.35 (5), p.985-993</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2024</rights><rights>2024. The Author(s).</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2024. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-3feaafa98c94c548f6edb90ae47568d79cbadc17811069e77486115c1659fd883</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-3feaafa98c94c548f6edb90ae47568d79cbadc17811069e77486115c1659fd883</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00192-024-05750-2$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00192-024-05750-2$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27902,27903,41466,42535,51296</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38416155$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Stoter, Lisa M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Notten, Kim J. B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Claas, Marieke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tijsseling, Deodata</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruefli, Maud</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van den Tillaart, Femke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Kuijk, Sander M. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Milani, Alfredo L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kluivers, Kristin B.</creatorcontrib><title>Patient Impression of Improvement 1 year After Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy in Women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Stage 2 or Higher</title><title>International Urogynecology Journal</title><addtitle>Int Urogynecol J</addtitle><addtitle>Int Urogynecol J</addtitle><description>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.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gynecologic Surgical Procedures - methods</subject><subject>Gynecology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hysterectomy</subject><subject>Hysterectomy, Vaginal - methods</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Patient Reported Outcome Measures</subject><subject>Pelvic organ prolapse</subject><subject>Pelvic Organ Prolapse - surgery</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Severity of Illness Index</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical outcomes</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Urology</subject><issn>0937-3462</issn><issn>1433-3023</issn><issn>1433-3023</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhi0EokPhBVggS2zYBI4vuXiFqqowlSp1pEJZWh7PScZVEgc7M5BH4W1xOkO5LFhZPv_v7_icn5CXDN4ygPJdBGCKZ8BlBnmZQ8YfkQWTQmQCuHhMFqBEmQlZ8BPyLMY7AJCQw1NyIirJCpbnC_JjZUaH_UgvuyFgjM731Nf3N7_HblYYndAEelaPGOiNscHHwfV-F-lyiqnmB_w-0VsMMZVuTeN60x4ltKPvJup6-sUnFv3mxi1dYbt3ll6HxvR0FXxrhoj0ZjQNUk59oEvXbDE8J09q00Z8cTxPyecPF5_Ol9nV9cfL87OrzMoyHzNRozG1UZVV0uayqgvcrBUYTGpRbUpl12ZjWVkxBoXCspRVwVhuWZGrelNV4pS8P3CH3brDjU0jB9PqIbjOhEl74_TfSu-2uvF7zRIGWMUT4c2REPzXHcZRdy5abFvTY1qT5kpwJUHks_X1P9Y7vwtpYVELKKRkXLAiufjBNe86BqwffsNAz9HrQ_Q6Ra_vo9cz-tWfczw8-ZV1MoiDISapbzD87v0f7E9-37xq</recordid><startdate>20240501</startdate><enddate>20240501</enddate><creator>Stoter, Lisa M.</creator><creator>Notten, Kim J. B.</creator><creator>Claas, Marieke</creator><creator>Tijsseling, Deodata</creator><creator>Ruefli, Maud</creator><creator>van den Tillaart, Femke</creator><creator>van Kuijk, Sander M. J.</creator><creator>Milani, Alfredo L.</creator><creator>Kluivers, Kristin B.</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20240501</creationdate><title>Patient Impression of Improvement 1 year After Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy in Women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Stage 2 or Higher</title><author>Stoter, Lisa M. ; Notten, Kim J. B. ; Claas, Marieke ; Tijsseling, Deodata ; Ruefli, Maud ; van den Tillaart, Femke ; van Kuijk, Sander M. J. ; Milani, Alfredo L. ; Kluivers, Kristin B.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-3feaafa98c94c548f6edb90ae47568d79cbadc17811069e77486115c1659fd883</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gynecologic Surgical Procedures - methods</topic><topic>Gynecology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hysterectomy</topic><topic>Hysterectomy, Vaginal - methods</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Patient Reported Outcome Measures</topic><topic>Pelvic organ prolapse</topic><topic>Pelvic Organ Prolapse - surgery</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Severity of Illness Index</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical outcomes</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Urology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Stoter, Lisa M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Notten, Kim J. B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Claas, Marieke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tijsseling, Deodata</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruefli, Maud</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van den Tillaart, Femke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Kuijk, Sander M. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Milani, Alfredo L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kluivers, Kristin B.</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>International Urogynecology Journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Stoter, Lisa M.</au><au>Notten, Kim J. B.</au><au>Claas, Marieke</au><au>Tijsseling, Deodata</au><au>Ruefli, Maud</au><au>van den Tillaart, Femke</au><au>van Kuijk, Sander M. J.</au><au>Milani, Alfredo L.</au><au>Kluivers, Kristin B.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Patient Impression of Improvement 1 year After Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy in Women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Stage 2 or Higher</atitle><jtitle>International Urogynecology Journal</jtitle><stitle>Int Urogynecol J</stitle><addtitle>Int Urogynecol J</addtitle><date>2024-05-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>985</spage><epage>993</epage><pages>985-993</pages><issn>0937-3462</issn><issn>1433-3023</issn><eissn>1433-3023</eissn><abstract>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.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><pmid>38416155</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00192-024-05750-2</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0937-3462 |
ispartof | International Urogynecology Journal, 2024-05, Vol.35 (5), p.985-993 |
issn | 0937-3462 1433-3023 1433-3023 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11150182 |
source | MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
subjects | Aged Clinical medicine Female Gynecologic Surgical Procedures - methods Gynecology Humans Hysterectomy Hysterectomy, Vaginal - methods Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Original Original Article Patient Reported Outcome Measures Pelvic organ prolapse Pelvic Organ Prolapse - surgery Prospective Studies Severity of Illness Index Surgery Surgical outcomes Treatment Outcome Urology |
title | Patient Impression of Improvement 1 year After Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy in Women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Stage 2 or Higher |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T09%3A11%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Patient%20Impression%20of%20Improvement%201%20year%20After%20Sacrospinous%20Hysteropexy%20Versus%20Vaginal%20Hysterectomy%20in%20Women%20with%20Pelvic%20Organ%20Prolapse%20Stage%202%20or%20Higher&rft.jtitle=International%20Urogynecology%20Journal&rft.au=Stoter,%20Lisa%20M.&rft.date=2024-05-01&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=985&rft.epage=993&rft.pages=985-993&rft.issn=0937-3462&rft.eissn=1433-3023&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00192-024-05750-2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E3064412316%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3064412316&rft_id=info:pmid/38416155&rfr_iscdi=true |