S'abonner

Long-term reoperation risk after apical prolapse repair in female pelvic reconstructive surgery - 20/07/22

Doi : 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.05.046 
Nemi M. Shah, MD a, b, , Alexander A. Berger, MD, MPH c, Zimin Zhuang, MS d, Jasmine Tan-Kim, MD a, Shawn A. Menefee, MD a
a Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Kaiser Permanente, San Diego, San Diego, CA 
b Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, & Reproductive Sciences, University of California San Diego Health, San Diego, CA 
c Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Penn Medicine, Princeton, NJ 
d Department of Research & Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, San Diego, CA 

Corresponding author: Nemi M. Shah, MD.

Abstract

Background

Although several different apical suspension procedures are available to women with pelvic organ prolapse, data on long-term efficacy and safety profiles are limited.

Objective

The primary aim of this study was to analyze longitudinal reoperation risk for recurrent prolapse among the 4 apical suspension procedures over 2 to 15 years. Secondary aims included evaluation of all-cause reoperation, defined as a repeated surgery for the indications of recurrent prolapse and adverse events, and total retreatment rate, which included a repeated treatment with another surgery or a pessary.

Study Design

This was a multicenter, retrospective cohort study within Kaiser Permanente Southern California that included women who underwent sacrocolpopexy, uterosacral ligament suspension, sacrospinous ligament fixation, or colpocleisis from January 2006 through December 2018. Women who underwent concomitant rectal prolapse repair or vaginal prolapse repair with mesh augmentation were excluded. Data were abstracted using procedural and diagnostic codes through July 2021, with manual review of 10% of each variable. Patient demographics and pessary use were compared using analysis of variance or chi square tests for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Time-to-event analysis was used to contrast reoperation rates. A Cox regression model was used to perform an adjusted multivariate analysis of the following predictors of reoperation for recurrence: index surgery, concomitant procedures, patient demographics, baseline comorbidities, and year of index surgery. Censoring events included exit from the health maintenance organization and death.

Results

The cohort included 9681 women with maximum follow-up of 14.8 years. The overall incidence of reoperation for recurrent prolapse was 7.4 reoperations per 1000 patient-years, which differed significantly by type of apical suspension (P<.0001). The incidence of reoperation was lower after colpocleisis (1.4 events per 1000 patient-years) and sacrocolpopexy (4.8 events per 1000 patient-years) when compared with uterosacral ligament suspension (9 events per 1000 patient-years) and sacrospinous ligament fixation (13.9 events per 1000 patient-years). All pairwise comparisons between procedures were significant (P=.0003–.0018) after correction for multiplicity, except for uterosacral ligament suspension or uterosacral ligament hysteropexy vs sacrospinous ligament fixation or sacrospinous ligament hysteropexy (P=.05). The index procedure was the only significant predictor of reoperation for recurrence (P=.0003–.0024) on multivariate regression analysis.

Reoperations for complications or sequelae (overall 2.9 events per 1000 patient-years) also differed by index procedure (P<.0001) and were highest after sacrocolpopexy (4.4 events per 1000 patient-years). The incidence of all-cause reoperation for recurrence and adverse events after sacrocolpopexy, however, was comparable to that of the other reconstructive procedures (P=.1–.4) in pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction. Similarly, frequency of pessary use differed by index procedure (P<.0001) and was highest after sacrospinous ligament fixation at 9.3% (43/464).

Conclusion

Among nearly 10,000 patients undergoing prolapse surgery within a large managed care organization, colpocleisis and sacrocolpopexy offered the most durable obliterative and reconstructive prolapse repairs, respectively. All-cause reoperation rates were lowest after colpocleisis by a large margin, but similar among reconstructive apical suspension procedures.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Key words : gynecologic surgery, pelvic organ prolapse, postoperative complications, prolapse surgery, surgical complications, time factors, treatment failure


Plan


 The authors report no conflict of interest.
 Funding was provided by the Kaiser Permanente Southern California Regional Research Committee (RRC). The RRC provided a programmer for data collection and a statistician for analysis. Study design, data interpretation, and reporting of findings were performed independently of the RRC.
 The study was presented at the 48th annual scientific meeting of the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons, San Antonio, TX, March 27–30, 2022.
 Cite this article as: Shah NM, Berger AA, Zhuang Z, et al. Long-term reoperation risk after apical prolapse repair in female pelvic reconstructive surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2022;227:306.e1-16.


© 2022  Elsevier Inc. Tous droits réservés.
Ajouter à ma bibliothèque Retirer de ma bibliothèque Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 227 - N° 2

P. 306.e1-306.e16 - août 2022 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • Development and validation of a simulation model for laparoscopic myomectomy
  • Rebecca J. Schneyer, Andrea L. Molina, Isabel C. Green, Stacey A. Scheib, Kristin C. Mara, Matthew T. Siedhoff, Kelly N. Wright, Mireille D. Truong
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • Oral phenazopyridine vs intravesical lidocaine for bladder onabotulinumtoxinA analgesia: a randomized controlled trial
  • Lauren E. Stewart, Moiuri Siddique, Kristin M. Jacobs, Christina A. Raker, Vivian W. Sung

Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?

Mon compte


Plateformes Elsevier Masson

Déclaration CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM est déclaré à la CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.

En application de la loi nº78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 relative à l'informatique, aux fichiers et aux libertés, vous disposez des droits d'opposition (art.26 de la loi), d'accès (art.34 à 38 de la loi), et de rectification (art.36 de la loi) des données vous concernant. Ainsi, vous pouvez exiger que soient rectifiées, complétées, clarifiées, mises à jour ou effacées les informations vous concernant qui sont inexactes, incomplètes, équivoques, périmées ou dont la collecte ou l'utilisation ou la conservation est interdite.
Les informations personnelles concernant les visiteurs de notre site, y compris leur identité, sont confidentielles.
Le responsable du site s'engage sur l'honneur à respecter les conditions légales de confidentialité applicables en France et à ne pas divulguer ces informations à des tiers.


Tout le contenu de ce site: Copyright © 2024 Elsevier, ses concédants de licence et ses contributeurs. Tout les droits sont réservés, y compris ceux relatifs à l'exploration de textes et de données, a la formation en IA et aux technologies similaires. Pour tout contenu en libre accès, les conditions de licence Creative Commons s'appliquent.