The effect of preoperative pelvic floor muscle training on urinary and colorectal-anal distress in women undergoing pelvic organ prolapse surgery-a randomized controlled trial

International urogynecology consultation chapter 3 committee 2; conservative treatment of patient with pelvic organ prolapse: Pelvic floor muscle training

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

This manuscript from Chapter 3 of the International Urogynecology Consultation (IUC) on Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) describes the current evidence and suggests future directions for research on the effect of pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) in prevention and treatment of POP.

METHODS

An international group of four physical therapists, four urogynecologists and one midwife/basic science researcher performed a search of the literature using pre-specified search terms on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in Ovid Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, PEDro and Scopus databases for publications between 1996 and 2021. Full publications or expanded abstracts in English or in other languages with abstracts in English were included. The PEDro rating scale (0-10) was used to evaluate study quality. Included RCTs were reviewed to summarize the evidence in six key sections: (1) evidence for PFMT in prevention of POP in the general female population; (2) evidence for early intervention of PFMT in the peripartum period for prevention and treatment of POP; (3) evidence for PFMT in treatment of POP in the general female population; (4) evidence for perioperative PFMT; (5) evidence for PFMT on associated conditions in women with POP; (6) evidence for the long-term effect of PFMT on POP. Full publications in English or in other languages with abstracts in English and expanded abstracts presented at international condition specific societies were included. Internal validity was examined by the PEDro rating scale (0-10).

RESULTS

After exclusion of duplicates and irrelevant trials, we classified and included 2 preventive trials, 4 trials in the post-partum period, 11 treatment trials of PFMT for POP in the general female population in comparison with no treatment or lifestyle interventions, 10 on PFMT as an adjunct treatment to POP surgery and 9 long-term treatment trials. Only three treatment studies compared PFMT with the use of a pessary. The RCTs scored between 4 and 8 on the PEDro scale. No primary prevention studies were found, and there is sparse and inconsistent evidence for early intervention in the postpartum period. There is good evidence/recommendations from 11 RCTs that PFMT is effective in reducing POP symptoms and/or improving POP stage (by one stage) in women with POP-Q stage I, II and III in the general female population, but no evidence from 9/10 RCTs that adding PFMT pre- and post -surgery for POP is effective. There are few long-term follow-up studies, and results are inconsistent. There are no serious adverse effects or complications reported related to PFMT.

CONCLUSIONS

There are few studies on prevention and in the postpartum period, and the effect is inconclusive. There is high-level evidence from 11 RCTs to recommend PFMT as first-line treatment for POP in the general female population. PFMT pre- and post-POP surgery does not seem to have any additional effect on POP. PFMT is effective and safe but needs thorough instruction and supervision to be effective.

Effects of Pelvic-Floor Muscle Training in Patients with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Approached with Surgery vs. Conservative Treatment: A Systematic Review

The aim of this systematic review was to explore the effectiveness of pelvic-floor muscle training (PFMT) in the treatment of women with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) who had undergone either surgery or only conservative treatment, based on a selection of randomized clinical trials (RCT). The search was carried out in PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, CINAHL, and PEDro databases between April 2021 and October 2021 using the following MeSH terms or keywords: “pelvic organ prolapse”, “POP”, “pelvic floor muscle training”, “pelvic floor muscle exercise”, “kegel exercise”, and “surgery”. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the PEDro scale. Eighteen RCTs were included in this review. The findings showed improvements in symptoms associated with POP, in pelvic-floor function, and in quality of life in women who performed a PFMT protocol. However, PFMT did not produce significant changes in sexual function, and the results of the change in POP stage were inconclusive. When viewing PFMT as a complementary treatment to surgery, no significant improvements were observed in any of the analyzed variables. In conclusion, a PFMT program is an effective way to improve the pelvic, urinary, and intestinal symptoms associated with POP; function of the pelvic floor; and quality of life. PFMT as an adjunct to surgery does not seem to provide a greater benefit than surgical treatment alone. RCTs of higher methodological quality, with a larger sample size and a longer follow-up, are needed to confirm the results.