Does vaginal estrogen treatment with support pessaries in vaginal prolapse reduce complications?

Patient experience of pain during vaginal pessary removal and insertion: a service evaluation study

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Pelvic organ prolapse is a common problem affecting women, but there is currently a lack of research focusing on patient experience of pessary changes. This study was aimed at capturing the patient perspective of pessary changes and formally assessing pain during pessary removal and insertion.

METHODS

A service evaluation request was granted by South Tees Hospitals NHS Trust. Patients undergoing pessary change (ring, shelf, or Gellhorn) in gynaecology outpatient clinics over a 6-month period were asked to rate their pain scores on a ten-point numerical pain-rating scale. Other associated data were collected.

RESULTS

Out of 213 women, 58.2% reported that pessary removal was more painful than insertion, 30.5% reported equal pain, and 10.8% reported that insertion was more painful than removal. Pain scores were significantly higher for removal (mean 4.37, median 4, IQR 4-7) than for insertion (mean 2.66, median 2, IQR 2-4, p <0.001). Ring pessaries were significantly less painful to both remove and insert than shelf and Gellhorn pessaries. Smaller pessaries were more painful to both remove and insert. There was no significant difference in pain scores reported by those with or without diagnosed vulval conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Pessary removal causes most women moderate pain, which should be communicated to patients beforehand. Ring pessaries are significantly less painful to change than other pessary types. Clinicians should consider pain as a factor in their decision-making surrounding pessary choice and when counselling patients. Future research should focus on ways to reduce pain during pessary removal.

The Impact of Vaginal Probiotics on Pessary Use: A Randomized Controlled Trial

IMPORTANCE

Pessary-related adverse effects are common, and treatment options are limited. Probiotics may improve pessary-related adverse effects by altering the vaginal microenvironment.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a vaginal probiotic suppository on the vaginal microenvironment among pessary users.

STUDY DESIGN

Women who used pessaries were randomized to vaginal probiotic suppository use versus without use. The intervention was a vaginal probiotic suppository and moisturizing vaginal gel. The vaginal microenvironment was assessed using Gram stain and Nugent's criteria at baseline and 3 months by a microbiologist blinded to group allocation. Symptoms and experience with use of the probiotic were assessed using questionnaires. The primary outcome was change in lactobacilli count on Nugent subscore at 3 months.

RESULTS

A total of 147 postmenopausal women were randomized (86 to the intervention arm and 61 to the control arm), and 124 (87.9%) presented for a 3-month follow-up. There was no difference between the arms in age, race, body mass index, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. A majority of participants had the pessary managed by the health care professional (intervention arm vs control arm, 46 [76.7%] vs 55 [68.8%]; P = 0.30). Composition of the vaginal microenvironment did not differ with or without probiotic treatment at 3 months. Bother from vaginal symptoms, including discharge, itching, and discomfort, did not differ between arms. Adverse effects from the intervention were minor, resolved with discontinuation, and occurred at 39.1%.

CONCLUSION

Vaginal probiotic suppository use did not affect the composition of the vaginal microenvironment, patient satisfaction, or vaginal symptoms after 3 months of use in pessary users.

Effect of estrogen on vaginal complications of pessary use: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to systematically review the impact of local estrogen use in combination with a pessary on vaginal complications in postmenopausal women with pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

METHODS

We searched databases including Medline, Embase, PubMed, Clinical Trials and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for relevant literature published in English from inception to 31 May 2021. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies were included.

RESULTS

In total, five studies were included (three RCTs, one prospective study and one retrospective cohort study). The meta-analysis was performed with subgroups. Our results indicated a significantly lower incidence of bacterial vaginosis (BV) among postmenopausal women who used estrogen than among controls, with a total pooled odds ratio (OR) of 0.29 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.11-0.72; I² = 38%; p = 0.008). The summary ORs of the estrogen use group were 0.98 (95% CI: 0.59-1.63; I² = 41%; p = 0.95) for vaginal ulceration, 0.80 (95% CI: 0.42-1.54; I² = 29%; p = 0.50) for vaginal bleeding and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.35-1.58; I² = 35%; p = 0.44) for vaginal discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Local estrogen in combination with a pessary could decrease the BV rate among postmenopausal women with POP. However, consensus regarding the value of estrogen use for decreasing other pessary complications has not yet been reached. Additional multicenter RCTs with large sample sizes should be conducted to better understand the effect of estrogen use on reducing pessary-related complications.

Does preoperative locally applied estrogen treatment facilitate prolapse-associated symptoms in postmenopausal women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse? A randomised controlled double-masked, placebo-controlled, multicentre study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether locally applied vaginal estrogen affects prolapse-associated complaints compared with placebo treatment in postmenopausal women prior to surgical prolapse repair.

DESIGN

Randomised, double-masked, placebo-controlled, multicentre study.

SETTING

Urogynaecology unit at the Medical University of Vienna and University Hospital of Tulln.

POPULATION

Postmenopausal women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse and planned surgical prolapse repair.

METHODS

Women were randomly assigned local estrogen cream or placebo cream 6 weeks preoperatively.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was differences in subjective prolapse-associated complaints after 6 weeks of treatment prior to surgery, assessed with the comprehensive German pelvic floor questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included differences in other pelvic floor-associated complaints (bladder, bowel or sexual function).

RESULTS

Out of 120 women randomised, 103 (86%) remained for the final analysis. After 6 weeks of treatment the prolapse domain score did not differ between the estrogen and the placebo groups (4.4 ± 0.19 versus 4.6 ± 0.19; mean difference, -0.21; 95% CI -0.74 to 0.33; P = 0.445). Multivariate analysis, including only women receiving the intervention, showed that none of the confounding factors modified the response to estradiol.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate that preoperative locally applied estrogen does not ameliorate prolapse-associated symptoms in postmenopausal women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Preoperative local estrogen does not ameliorate prolapse-associated symptoms in postmenopausal women with pelvic organ prolapse.

Is the Visual Analogue Scale inferior to the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory for assessing symptom bother of pelvic organ prolapse?

AIMS

Disease-specific validated questionnaires are used to quantify symptom severity, but they are time consuming to complete and evaluate. A Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) assessment of bother is simpler and faster. The aim of this study is to compare VAS with individual and composite pelvic floor disability index-short form 20 items in predicting significant pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of data was obtained at a tertiary urogynaecological clinic between February 2017 and August 2018. All women filled out the PFDI-20 and underwent a standardised physician-directed interview, POP-Q and translabial ultrasound. Women with symptoms of POP were asked to indicate the degree of bother using a VAS. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to evaluate the performance of individual Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory (POPDI)-6 items, the six-item composite POPDI-6 score, and VAS in predicting significant POP on clinical and ultrasound examination.

RESULTS

The complete data sets of 231 women were analysed. Median VAS for POP was 2.9 (range 0-10). Median POPDI-6 individual and composite scores for items one to six were 2, 2, 2, 1, 2, 0 (all range 0-4) and 9 (range 0-22), respectively. The majority had significant prolapse on clinical examination (n = 195, 84%) and on ultrasound (n = 192, 83%). The composite POPDI-6 prolapse score provided areas under the curve of 0.68 and 0.64 for the prediction of clinical and sonographic POP, compared to 0.74 and 0.69, respectively, for VAS. The difference was not significant (P = 0.3 and 0.8, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The VAS score was not inferior to the POPDI-6 in predicting significant POP. It has the potential to simplify the assessment of symptom severity.

Effect of vaginal estrogen in postmenopausal women using vaginal pessary for pelvic organ prolapse treatment: a randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Evidence and recommendations for the use of intravaginal estrogen for prevention of bacterial vaginosis and pessary-related complications are limited and controversial. We hypothesized that adding intravaginal estrogen to pessary use would decrease the incidence of bacterial vaginosis and other pessary-related complications.

METHODS

A single-center, open-label, randomized, parallel study was conducted between April 2018 and August 2020. Participants were randomized to either receive intravaginal estriol 0.03 mg plus Lactobacillus acidophilus 100 million viable cell vaginal tablets or have no treatment. The Amsel criteria, normal flora index, visual analog scale, Thai version of the ICIQ-VS (International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Vaginal symptoms) questionnaire, vaginal abrasions and vaginal bleeding were evaluated at entry and at 2- and 14-week follow-up.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight women were included and randomized to two groups (39 women per group). At 2-week follow-up, one participant in the intervention group and two participants in the control group were diagnosed with bacterial vaginosis (2.7% vs. 5.7%, p = 0.609). At 14-week follow-up, two participants in the intervention group and two participants in the control group were diagnosed with bacterial vaginosis (5.7% vs. 6.2%, p = 0.926). Normal flora index was significantly different at 2-week follow-up [8 (6.3) vs. 5 (6.0), p = 0.032]. There was no significant difference in the visual analog scale, Thai version of the ICIQ-VS, vaginal abrasions and vaginal bleeding between the 2- and 14-week follow-ups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows no benefit of intravaginal estrogen in reducing bacterial vaginosis, vaginal abrasions, vaginal bleeding and pain in postmenopausal women using a vaginal pessary for pelvic organ prolapse treatment.

Guideline No. 411: Vaginal Pessary Use

OBJECTIVE

To review the use, care, and fitting of pessaries.

TARGET POPULATION

Women requiring the use of vaginal pessaries for pelvic organ prolapse and/or stress urinary incontinence. Use may also be indicated for women with certain pregnancy-related clinical scenarios, including incarcerated uterus.

OPTIONS

Pessaries are an option for women presenting with prolapse and/or stress urinary incontinence. In addition, certain types of pessaries can be considered for patients with cervical insufficiency or incarcerated uterus.

OUTCOMES

Most women with prolapse or stress urinary incontinence can be successfully fitted with a pessary and experience excellent symptom relief, high satisfaction rates, and minimal complications.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

Women with pelvic organ prolapse and/or stress urinary incontinence may choose to use a pessary to manage their symptoms rather than surgery or while waiting for surgery. Major complications have been seen only when pessaries are neglected. Minor complications such as vaginal discharge, odour, and erosions can usually be successfully treated.

EVIDENCE

Medline was searched for relevant articles up to December 2018. This is an update of the SOGC technical update published in 2013, which was the first internationally published guidance on pessary use. Subsequently, an Australian guideline on the use of pessaries for the treatment of prolapse was published later in 2013.

VALIDATION METHODS

The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the approach of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Appendix A).

INTENDED AUDIENCE

Gynaecologists, obstetricians, family physicians, physiotherapists, residents, and fellows.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

RECOMMENDATION.

ESTROgen use for complications in women treating pelvic organ prolapse with vaginal PESSaries (ESTRO-PESS)-a randomized clinical trial

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

To evaluate the complications of new users' vaginal pessaries (VP), with and without the use of vaginal estrogen after a 6-month follow-up.

METHODS

A parallel, single-blinded, randomized, controlled trial. Symptomatic postmenopausal women (n = 98) with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) (stage 3/4) were recruited from August 2018 to October 2019. Patients were randomized into the local estrogen group (promestriene 3 × for a week) and the control group (no estrogen). They were evaluated for their vaginal symptoms at the baseline, after 3 months, and after 6 months, and a physical examination and vaginal sampling for microbiological analysis were done. Data were analyzed according to an intention-to-treat analysis (ITT). A 5% significance level was established for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty women discontinued treatment (20.4%), mainly due to pessary extrusion (n = 15) and 5 for other reasons (lost to follow-up, pain, and surgery). Baseline characteristics were not statistically different between the estrogen and control groups. Regarding the presence of complications, the presence of erosion was 10% in the control group, but there was no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.175) after 6 months. Bacterial vaginosis (BV) was more prevalent in the control group, according to the Nugent (p = 0.007) and Amsel (p = 0.014) criteria. Urinary urgency and increased urinary frequency were significantly improved in the estrogen group after 6 months.

CONCLUSION

There was no evident benefit related to complications such as ulcerations, itching, and vaginal discharge/odor from the use of vaginal estrogen in POP women using pessaries.

Directive clinique n° 411 : Utilisation des pessaires

OBJECTIF

Passer en revue l'utilisation, l'entretien et l'ajustement des pessaires.

POPULATION CIBLE

Les femmes qui ont besoin d'utiliser un pessaire en raison d'un prolapsus génital et/ou d'une incontinence urinaire d'effort. L'utilisation peut être indiquée chez les femmes enceintes dans certains scénarios cliniques liés à la grossesse, dont l'incarcération utérine et le risque de travail préterme liée à l'incompétence du col.

OPTIONS

Les pessaires constituent une option pour les femmes atteintes d'un prolapsus et/ou d'une incontinence urinaire d'effort. De plus, certains types de pessaires peuvent être utilisés chez des patientes atteintes d'incompétence du col ou d'une incarcération utérine.

ISSUES

Il est possible de trouver un pessaire efficace chez la plupart des femmes atteintes d'un prolapsus génital ou d'une incontinence urinaire d'effort de façon à obtenir un excellent soulagement des symptômes, un taux de satisfaction élevé et des complications minimes. BéNéFICES, RISQUES ET COûTS: Les femmes atteintes d'un prolapsus génital et/ou d'une incontinence urinaire d'effort peuvent choisir d'utiliser un pessaire pour traiter leurs symptômes au lieu de subir une intervention chirurgicale ou dans l'attente d'une telle intervention. Des complications majeures ont été observées seulement en cas de soins de pessaire négligés. Les complications mineures (telles que les pertes vaginales, les odeurs et les érosions) sont généralement traitables avec succès. DONNéES PROBANTES: Des recherches ont été effectuées dans la base de données Medline afin de récupérer les articles pertinents publiés jusqu'en décembre 2018. Le présent document constitue une mise à jour de la mise à jour technique de la SOGC publiée en 2013, laquelle a été la première directive clinique publiée à l'international relativement à l'utilisation des pessaires. Une ligne directrice australienne sur l'utilisation des pessaires pour le traitement du prolapsus a été publiée plus tard en 2013. MéTHODES DE VALIDATION: Les auteures ont évalué la qualité des données probantes et la solidité des recommandations au moyen des critères du cadre méthodologique du Groupe d'étude canadien sur les soins de santé préventifs (annexe A). PROFESSIONNELS CONCERNéS: Gynécologues, obstétriciens, médecins de famille, physiothérapeutes, résidents et moniteurs cliniques (fellows). DÉCLARATIONS SOMMAIRES: RECOMMANDATION.

An Arterial Vaginal Bleed Resulting from Short-Term Pessary Use: A Case Report

BACKGROUND

Pessaries are commonly used for the management of pelvic organ prolapse. Complications are rare, with major complications usually related to long-term use and neglect. Complications related to short-term pessary use, as well as complications requiring surgical intervention, are even less common.

CASE

We present the case of a 58-year-old postmenopausal woman who presented with acute, arterial vaginal bleeding requiring surgical intervention 3 weeks after being fitted for a pessary for management of pelvic organ prolapse.

CONCLUSION

Severe, short-term complications are rare, but can occur with pessary management of pelvic organ prolapse. To our knowledge, this is the first case to describe an acute arterial hemorrhage requiring surgical intervention following short-term placement of a vaginal pessary.

Timing of Office-Based Pessary Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the influence of pessary visit intervals on development of vaginal epithelial abnormalities.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, noninferiority trial of office-based pessary care. Eligible participants were adult women wearing a ring, Gellhorn, or incontinence dish pessary to treat pelvic organ prolapse or incontinence or both. Patients were randomized 1:1 to routine pessary care (office visits every 12 weeks, "routine" arm) or to extended pessary care (office visits every 24 weeks, "extended" arm). The primary study outcome was rate of vaginal epithelial abnormalities (epithelial break or erosion) at the final study visit (48 weeks). The predetermined noninferiority margin was 7.5%.

RESULTS

From January 2015 through June 2017, inclusive, 448 patients were screened and 130 were randomized, 64 to the routine arm and 66 to the extended arm. Baseline characteristics of the study arms were similar with the exception of pessary type, with ring pessary more common in the routine arm and Gellhorn pessary more common in the extended arm (P=.02). The rate of epithelial abnormalities at the final study visit (48 weeks) was 7.4% in the routine arm and 1.7% in the extended arm (difference, -5.7 percentage points; 95% CI -7.4 to -4), which met the criterion for noninferiority. Rates of all types of epithelial abnormalities did not differ between arms at any time point. Increasing duration of pessary use (P=.003) and history of prior epithelial abnormalities were associated with development of epithelial abnormalities (P=.01). Other than epithelial abnormalities, no adverse events related to pessary use occurred in either arm.

CONCLUSION

In women who receive office-based pessary care and are using a ring, Gellhorn, or incontinence dish pessary, routine follow-up every 24 weeks is noninferior to every 12 weeks based on incidence of vaginal epithelial abnormalities.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02371083.

Effectiveness of hormones in postmenopausal pelvic floor dysfunction-International Urogynecological Association research and development-committee opinion

Introduction and hypothesis

There is clear evidence of the presence of estradiol receptors (ERs) in the female lower urinary and genital tract. Furthermore, it is a fact that estrogen deficiency after menopause may cause atrophic changes of the urogenital tract as well as various urinary symptoms. Moreover, the effect of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) on urinary incontinence (UI) symptoms as well as pelvic organ prolapse (POP), anal incontinence (AI) and vulvovaginal symptoms (VVS) is still a matter of debate. This committee opinion paper summarizes the best evidence on influence of sex steroids as well as hormonal treatment (local and systemic) in postmenopausal women with pelvic floor disorders.

Methods

A working subcommittee from the International Urogynecology Association (IUGA) Research and Development Committee was formed. A thorough literature search was conducted and an opinion statement expressed. The literature regarding hormones and pelvic floor disorders was reviewed independently and summarized by the individual members of the sub-committee.

Results

The majority of studies reported that vaginal estrogen treatment when compared with placebo has more beneficial effects on symptoms and signs of vaginal atrophy including sensation of burning, dyspareunia and UI symptoms. Definitive evidence on local estrogen application and prolapse treatment or prevention is lacking. A statistically significant increase in risk of worsening of UI as well as development of de novo incontinence was observed with estrogen-only or combination systemic HRT.

Conclusions

In summary, local estrogen seems to be safe and effective in the treatment of VVS and can also improve urinary symptoms in postmenopausal patients with UI, but most of these recommendations correspond to evidence level 2C. The evidence in POP is still scarce but not in favor of benefit. Finally, the duration of local estrogen treatment (LET), optimal dosage, long-term effects and cost-effectiveness compared with current practice are still unknown.

Assessment and management of urinary incontinence in women

Urinary incontinence is a common and usually hidden issue that can affect women of all ages. It is often ignored by the patient because of their misconception that incontinence is an inevitable consequence of ageing and their low expectations of successful treatment. There are various types of incontinence, with symptoms that can significantly affect patients' quality of life. This article aims to enhance nurses' understanding of the types of urinary incontinence affecting women, associated risk factors and continence assessment, as well as the initial investigations and conservative treatments that can be instigated by general nurses. It also discusses some of the advanced treatments offered by specialist services. The article emphasises the importance of undertaking a holistic continence assessment to ensure appropriate continence care is provided, and how tailoring this care to the individual can improve adherence to treatment plans.