The Role of Uterine Preservation at the Time of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery.

IF 0.8 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Olivia H Chang, Alison Carter Ramirez, Allison Edwards, Henry H Chill, Juraj Letko, Katherine L Woodburn, Geoffrey W Cundiff
{"title":"The Role of Uterine Preservation at the Time of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery.","authors":"Olivia H Chang, Alison Carter Ramirez, Allison Edwards, Henry H Chill, Juraj Letko, Katherine L Woodburn, Geoffrey W Cundiff","doi":"10.1097/SPV.0000000000001667","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of the study was to synthesize the current literature and provide surgeons with data to inform counseling of eligible patients for uterine-preserving prolapse surgery (UPPS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We compared UPPS to similar techniques incorporating hysterectomy, including native-tissue repairs by vaginal, laparoscopic, or open approach; mesh-reinforced repairs by vaginal, laparoscopic, or open approach; obliterative repairs; and the Manchester procedure. Reviewed outcomes include surgical and patient-reported outcomes, complications, uterine pathology, and sexual function. We conducted a structured literature search of English language articles published 1990-2023, combining MeSH terms for pelvic organ prolapse and UPPS. Data were categorized by procedure and approach, and evaluated to provide recommendations and strength of evidence based on group consensus.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patient counseling on prolapse surgery should follow a benefit/risk assessment related to techniques that preserve the uterus. The discussion should include the benefits of hysterectomy for cancer detection and prevention and acknowledgment that patients should continue cervical cancer screening and evaluation of abnormal uterine bleeding following UPPS. The rate of hysterectomy after UPPS is low and most commonly for recurrent prolapse. If cervical elongation is present, trachelectomy should be considered at the time of UPPS. There is no difference in sexual function between UPPS and prolapse repair with hysterectomy. Data on pregnancy outcomes following UPPS are limited.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Uterine-preserving prolapse surgery should be a surgical option for all patients considering surgical treatment for symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse unless contraindications exist. Uterine-preserving prolapse surgery should be offered using an individualized benefit and risk discussion of both approaches to help patients make an informed decision based on their own values.</p>","PeriodicalId":75288,"journal":{"name":"Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000001667","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the study was to synthesize the current literature and provide surgeons with data to inform counseling of eligible patients for uterine-preserving prolapse surgery (UPPS).

Methods: We compared UPPS to similar techniques incorporating hysterectomy, including native-tissue repairs by vaginal, laparoscopic, or open approach; mesh-reinforced repairs by vaginal, laparoscopic, or open approach; obliterative repairs; and the Manchester procedure. Reviewed outcomes include surgical and patient-reported outcomes, complications, uterine pathology, and sexual function. We conducted a structured literature search of English language articles published 1990-2023, combining MeSH terms for pelvic organ prolapse and UPPS. Data were categorized by procedure and approach, and evaluated to provide recommendations and strength of evidence based on group consensus.

Results: Patient counseling on prolapse surgery should follow a benefit/risk assessment related to techniques that preserve the uterus. The discussion should include the benefits of hysterectomy for cancer detection and prevention and acknowledgment that patients should continue cervical cancer screening and evaluation of abnormal uterine bleeding following UPPS. The rate of hysterectomy after UPPS is low and most commonly for recurrent prolapse. If cervical elongation is present, trachelectomy should be considered at the time of UPPS. There is no difference in sexual function between UPPS and prolapse repair with hysterectomy. Data on pregnancy outcomes following UPPS are limited.

Conclusions: Uterine-preserving prolapse surgery should be a surgical option for all patients considering surgical treatment for symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse unless contraindications exist. Uterine-preserving prolapse surgery should be offered using an individualized benefit and risk discussion of both approaches to help patients make an informed decision based on their own values.

子宫保存在盆腔器官脱垂手术中的作用。
目的:本研究的目的是综合现有文献,为外科医生提供符合条件的保留子宫脱垂手术(UPPS)患者的咨询提供数据。方法:我们将UPPS与类似的子宫切除术技术进行比较,包括阴道、腹腔镜或开放入路的本地组织修复;经阴道、腹腔镜或开放入路的网状补强修复;闭塞的维修;和曼彻斯特程序。回顾的结果包括手术和患者报告的结果、并发症、子宫病理和性功能。我们对发表于1990-2023年的英文文章进行了结构化的文献检索,结合了盆腔器官脱垂和UPPS的MeSH术语。数据按程序和方法分类,并根据群体共识进行评估,以提供建议和证据的强度。结果:脱垂手术的患者咨询应遵循与保留子宫技术相关的获益/风险评估。讨论应包括子宫切除术对癌症检测和预防的益处,并承认患者应继续进行宫颈癌筛查和评估UPPS后异常子宫出血。子宫切除术后的UPPS率很低,最常见的是复发性脱垂。如果存在宫颈伸长,则应在UPPS时考虑气管切除术。UPPS与脱垂修复合并子宫切除术在性功能方面无差异。关于UPPS后妊娠结局的数据有限。结论:除非存在禁忌症,否则保留子宫脱垂手术应作为所有考虑手术治疗的盆腔器官脱垂患者的手术选择。保留子宫脱垂手术应提供个性化的利益和风险讨论两种方法,以帮助患者根据自己的价值观做出明智的决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信