Does the choice of pelvic organ prolapse treatment influence subjective pelvic-floor related quality of life?

Quality of Life Following Pelvic Organ Prolapse Treatments in Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Quality of life (QoL) improvement is one of the main outcomes in the management of pelvic organ prolapse as a chronic illness in women. This systematic review aimed to investigate the impact of surgical or pessary treatment for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) on quality of life. Methods: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was applied. Electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, were searched for original articles that evaluated the QoL before and after surgical interventions or pessary in pelvic organ prolapse from 1 January 2012 until 30 June 2022 with a combination of proper keywords. Included studies were categorized based on interventions, and they were tabulated to summarize the results. Results: Overall, 587 citations were retrieved. Of these, 76 articles were found eligible for final review. Overall, three categories of intervention were identified: vaginal surgeries (47 studies), abdominal surgeries (18 studies), and pessary intervention (11 studies). Almost all interventions were associated with improved quality of life. The results of the meta-analysis showed a significant association between the employment of surgical approach techniques (including vaginal and abdominal surgeries) and the quality of life (Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI) (MD: −48.08, 95% CI: −62.34 to −33.77, p-value < 0.01), Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ) (MD: −33.41, 95% CI: −43.48 to −23.34, p < 0.01)) and sexual activity of patients with pelvic organ prolapse (Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ) (MD: 4.84, 95% CI: 1.75 to 7.92, p < 0.01)). Furthermore, narrative synthesis for studies investigating the effect of the pessary approach showed a positive association between the use of this instrument and improvement in the quality of life and sexual activity. Conclusions: The results of our study revealed a significant improvement in the women’s quality of life following abdominal and vaginal reconstructive surgery. The use of pessary was also associated with increased patient quality of life.

Do vaginal pessaries used to treat pelvic organ prolapse impact on sexual function? A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is common and associated with sexual dysfunction. Vaginal pessaries are an effective treatment for POP, but their impact on sexual function is not well established. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to establish the impact of vaginal pessaries used for POP on female sexual function.

METHODS

Systematic review of the literature following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and checklist. A comprehensive search was conducted across Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov , The WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, Open Grey and Scopus Citation Database. Randomised controlled trials and cohort studies that assessed sexual function in women pre- and post-pessary treatment for POP were included, assessed for risk of bias and their results synthesised.

RESULTS

A total of 1,945 titles and abstracts were screened, 104 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, 14 studies were included in the narrative analysis and 7 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results suggest that, in sexually active women, there is no evidence of a deterioration in sexual function and some evidence of an improvement.

DISCUSSION

This review offers reassurance that in sexually active women who successfully use a pessary for treatment of their prolapse, there is no deterioration in sexual function. There is some evidence of an improvement in sexual function, but given the clinical heterogeneity in the studies included, caution should be taken in generalising these findings.