[Pelvic fracture and urogenital dysfunction in women: A literature review]

INTRODUCTION

The consequences of a pelvic fracture on pelvic statics and sexuality in women are often overlooked and relegated to secondary care.

OBJECTIVE

To carry out a state of knowledge on disorders of pelvic statics and sexuality in patients with a history of pelvic fracture: incidence, risk factors, management.

METHODS

Literature review on the Pubmed, Medline, Embase and Cochrane database using the following keywords and MeSH terms: pelvis floor dysfunction, urinary dysfunction, sexual dysfunction, pelvic organ prolapse, in association with the terms pelvic fracture, pelvic trauma.

RESULTS

Among the 270 initial articles, 21 were selected. Finally, one retrospective cohort study has evaluated the impact of pelvic fracture on the onset of a genital prolapse, 2 comparative retrospective studies and one prospective study focused on the impact of pelvic fracture on lower urinary tract symptoms. One comprehensive review studied pelvic fracture and sexuality outcomes. The incidence of prolapse following pelvic fracture could not be identified. The incidence of lower urinary tract symptoms varies between 21 and 67% with a significant difference for urinary urgency without leakage (P=0.016) and SUI (P=0.004). The incidence of sexual disorders varies between 21 and 62% with a predominance of dyspareunia. The mechanism of the trauma is thought to be a contributing factor, as well as the damage of the pubic symphysis (RR 4.8 95% CI 2.0-11.2).

CONCLUSION

The evaluation of urogenital, sexual and anorectal dysfunctions following trauma to the pelvis has so far been little explored in the literature. Future prospective studies are to be carried out to improve patient care.

[Validation of a new self-questionnaire to assess sexuality in patients operated on for urinary incontinence or genital prolapse (Pelvi-Perineal Surgery Sexuality Questionnaire - PPSSQ)]

INTRODUCTION

The main objective of this study was to validate a new questionnaire evaluating sexual health, in a population of sexually active women or not, who have surgery for stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse with or without mesh reinforcement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

After the development of a first version of the questionnaire by members from the main French societies involved in the study of women's sexuality, a linguistic validation of the content of the questionnaire was carried out through semi-structured interviews. Then, a psychometric validation was carried out in a prospective multicenter cohort study. The questionnaire was evaluated in terms of acceptability, quality, dimensionality, internal consistency, temporal stability, sensitivity to changes and construction validity.

RESULTS

Linguistic validation was carried out in 25 patients. Psychometric validation was carried out in 297 women (291 with available data) operated on for urinary incontinence by midurethral sling (n=79) or for pelvic organ prolapse by the vaginal route with mesh (n=105), without mesh (n=22) or by laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (n=85) between January 18, 2013 and January 18, 2016. Within the 288/291 women who had filed the question No. 1 allowing to know their sexual "status", 159 (55%) women were sexually active and 129 (45%) women were not sexually active before surgery. Within the 288 women, 165 had completed the questionnaire preoperatively and at 12 months and 111 had completed the questionnaire at 12 months and 12 months+1 week. The questionnaire was well accepted by the women and of good quality. All the questions were kept, but a change in the order and numbering of the questions had to be made. Two clinically relevant dimensions were identified in this analysis: a "sexual health" dimension comprising 5 questions and a "discomfort and pain" dimension comprising 3 questions. The overall questionnaire and both dimensions had good reliability and moderate to excellent temporal stability. A statistically significant association was demonstrated between question 15 and the improvement reported by PGI-I and the anatomical success rate on POP-Q classification. A strong correlation was found between the "sexual health" score and the total FSFI score.

CONCLUSION

The Pelvi-Perineal Surgery Sexuality Questionnaire (PPSSQ) is a 13-question self-questionnaire validated in a population of sexually active women or not, operated on for stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse by laparoscopy or vaginal surgery, with or without mesh.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

[Pelvic and perineal pain after genital prolapse: A literature review]

INTRODUCTION

Pelvic and perineal pain after genital prolapse surgery is a serious and frequent post-operative complication which diagnosis and therapeutic management can be complex.

MATERIALS ET METHODS

A literature review was carried out on the Pubmed database using the following words and MeSH : genital prolapse, pain, dyspareunia, genital prolapse and pain, genital prolapse and dyspareunia, genital prolapse and surgery, pain and surgery.

RESULTS

Among the 133 articles found, 74 were selected. Post-operative chronic pelvic pain persisting more than 3 months after surgery according to the International Association for the Study of Pain. It can be nociceptive, neuropathic or dysfunctional. Its diagnosis is mainly clinical. Its incidence is estimated between 1% and 50% and the risk factors are young age, the presence of comorbidities, history of prolapse surgery, severe prolapse, preoperative pain, invasive surgical approach, simultaneous placement of several meshes, less operator experience, increased operative time and early post-operative pain. The vaginal approach can cause a change in compliance and vaginal length as well as injury to the pudendal, sciatic and obturator nerves and in some cases lead to myofascial pelvic pain syndrome, whereas the laparoscopic approach can lead to parietal nerve damage. Therapeutic management is multidisciplinary and complex.

CONCLUSION

Pelvic pain after genital prolapse surgery is still obscure to this day.

Evolution of patients with and without preoperative stress urinary incontinence after surgical cystocele repair by mesh implantation using a vaginal approach

INTRODUCTION

To review the short-term evolution of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after Uphold™ LITE mesh implantation for genital prolapse repair.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective, descriptive, single centre study of women undergoing genital prolapse surgery with Uphold™ LITE mesh insertion between July 2016 and April 2019. Pre-, peri- and 1-year postoperative follow-up data were collected.

RESULTS

Thirty-six women were included (mean age: 72±7years). Most patients (75%) had grade III cystocele and three (8.3%) had recurrent prolapse. Mean operative time was 41±12min. During surgery, no visceral injury or haemorrhagic complications were noted but there were three intraoperative bladder injuries (8.3%). Twelve patients (33.3%) had preoperative SUI, half of which (n=6; 50%) responded to prolapse repair. De novo SUI was noted in 6/24 (25%) patients. The risk of having persistent postoperative SUI was 50% in patients with preoperative SUI, and the risk of developing de novo postoperative SUI was 25% in patients without preoperative SUI. Thus, patients with preoperative SUI were twice as likely to have persistent postoperative SUI as those without preoperative SUI (RR=2.0 [95% CI: 0.8175-4.8928]; P=0.128). Five patients with de novo SUI and three patients with persistent postoperative SUI were subsequently treated with insertion of a mid-urethral sling (MUS). The other patients improved with physiotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Risk of persistent SUI after implantation of an Uphold™ LITE mesh is higher in patients with preoperative SUI. Surgical correction with a MUS can be offered in cases of de novo SUI before or after physiotherapy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

[Uterine preservation or not during prolapse surgery: Review of the literature]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of hysterectomy in case of genital prolapse on the anatomical and functional results, and on per and post operative complications compared with uterine preservation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a review of the Pubmed, Medline, Embase and Cochrane literature using the following terms and MeSH (Medical Subject Headings of the National Library of Medicine): uterine prolapse; genital prolapse; prolapse surgery; vaginal prolapse surgery; abdominal prolapse surgery; hysterectomy; hysteropexy; sacrocolpopexy; surgical meshes; complications; sexuality; neoplasia; urinary; incontinence; cancer.

RESULTS

Among the 168 abstracts studied, 63 publications were retained. Whatever performance of hysterectomy or not, anatomical and functional results were similar in abdominal surgery (sacrocolpopexy) (OR=2.21 [95% CI: 0.33-14.67]) or vaginal surgery (OR=1.07 [95% CI: 0.38-2.99]). There was no difference in terms of urinary symptoms or sexuality after surgery. Hysterectomy was associated to a higher morbidity (bleeding, prolonged operating time, longer hospital stay), to an increased risk of mesh exposure particularly in case of total hysterectomy (8.6%; 95% CI: 6.3-11).

CONCLUSION

In the absence of evidence of superiority in terms of anatomical and functional outcomes, with an increased rate of complications, concomitant hysterectomy with prolapse surgery should probably not be performed routinely.

[Preoperative functional explorations of genital prolapse (urodynamics, dynamic MRI)]

The evaluation of genital prolapse is essentially clinical; however imaging tests such as dynamic MRI or urodynamic explorations may be useful in complex cases, especially before surgical management. Dynamic MRI allows morphological and dynamic analysis of pelvic floor and levator ani function. It can also detect post-obstetric injuries, although the long-term significance of these injuries remains to be discovered. Quantification of the severity of prolapse is possible with MRI; however, the correlation of these measures with clinical examination seems poor. Its interest lies mainly in the qualitative assessment of the three stages of prolapse and the detection of elytroceles, which can be difficult to clinical examination. Urodynamics provides useful information on vesico-sphincteric function, but none of these parameters seems to be decisive in the management of prolapse.

[Treatment of Urinary incontinence associated with genital prolapse: Clinical practrice guidelines]

INTRODUCTION

Prolapse and urinary incontinence are frequently associated. Patente (or proven) stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is defined by a leakage of urine that occurs with coughing or Valsalva, in the absence of any prolapse reduction manipulation. Masked urinary incontinence results in leakage of urine occurring during reduction of prolapse during the clinical examination in a patient who does not describe incontinence symptoms at baseline. The purpose of this chapter is to consider on the issue of systematic support or not of urinary incontinence, patent or hidden, during the cure of pelvic organs prolapse by abdominal or vaginal approach.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This work is based on an systematic review of the literature (PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, EMBASE) for meta-analyzes, randomized trials, registries, literature reviews, controlled studies and major not controlled studies, published on the subject. Its implementation has followed the methodology of the HAS on the recommendations for clinical practice, with a scientific argument (with the level of evidence, NP) and a recommendation grade (A, B, C, and professional agreement).

RESULTS

In case of patent IUE, concomitant treatment of prolapse and SUI reduces the risk of postoperative SUI. However, the isolated treatment of prolapse can treat up to 30% of preoperative SUI. Concomitant treatment of SUI exposed to a specific overactive bladder and dysuria morbidity. The presence of a hidden IUE represents a risk of postoperative SUI, but there is no clinical or urodynamic test to predict individually the risk of postoperative SUI. Moreover, the isolated treatment of prolapse can treat up to 60% of the masked SUI. Concomitant treatment of the hidden IUE therefore exposes again to overtreatment and a specific overactive bladder and dysuria morbidity.

CONCLUSION

In case of overt or hidden urinary incontinence, concomitant treatment of SUI and prolapse reduces the risk of postoperative SUI but exposes to a specific overactive bladder and dysuria morbidity (NP3). The isolated treatment of prolapse often allows itself to treat preoperative SUI. We can suggest not to treat SUI (whether patent or hidden) at the same time, providing that women are informed of the possibility of 2 stages surgery (Grade C). © 2016 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.

[Assessment before surgical treatment for pelvic organ prolapse: Clinical practice guidelines]

INTRODUCTION

The issue addressed in this chapter of recommendations is: What is the clinical and para-clinical assessment to achieve in women with genital prolapse and for whom surgical treatment has been decided. What are the clinical elements of the examination that must be taken into account as a risk factor of failure or relapse after surgery, in order to anticipate and evaluate possible surgical difficulties, and to move towards a preferred surgical technique?

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This work is based on a systematic review of the literature (PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, Cochrane Database of Systemactic Reviews, EMBASE) for meta-analyzes, randomized trials, registries, literature reviews, controlled studies and major not controlled studies, published on the subject. Its implementation has followed the methodology of the HAS on the recommendations for clinical practice, with a scientific argument (with the level of evidence, NP) and a recommendation grade (A, B, C, and professional agreement [AP]).

RESULTS

It suits first of all to describe prolapse, by clinical examination, helped, if needed, by a supplement of imagery if clinical examination data are insufficient or in case of discrepancy between the functional signs and clinical anomalies found, or in case of doubt in associated pathology. It suits to look relapse risk factors (high grade prolapse) and postoperative complications risk factors (risk factors for prothetic exposure, surgical approach difficulties, pelvic pain syndrome with hypersensitivity) to inform the patient and guide the therapeutic choice. Urinary functional disorders associated with prolapse (urinary incontinence, overactive bladder, dysuria, urinary tract infection, upper urinary tract impact) will be search and evaluated by interview and clinical examination and by a flowmeter with measurement of the post voiding residue, a urinalysis, and renal-bladder ultrasound. In the presence of voiding disorders, it is appropriate to do their clinical and urodynamic evaluation. In the absence of any spontaneous or hidden urinary sign, there is so far no reason to recommend systematically urodynamic assessment. Anorectal symptoms associated with prolapse (irritable bowel syndrome, obstruction of defecation, fecal incontinence) should be search and evaluated. Before prolapse surgery, it is essential not to ignore gynecologic pathology.

CONCLUSION

Before proposing a surgical cure of genital prolapse of women, it suits to achieve a clinical and paraclinical assessment to describe prolapse (anatomical structures involved, grade), to look for recurrence, difficulties approach and postoperative complications risk factors, and to appreciate the impact or the symptoms associated with prolapse (urinary, anorectal, gynecological, pelvic-perineal pain) to guide their evaluation and their treatment. © 2016 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.

[Laparoscopic lateral suspension, another way to treat genital prolapse]

The laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy is the treatment of choice of pelvic organ prolapses since more than twenty years. The laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh is an alternative technique. Its originality is the subperitoneal passing of the lateral arm of the mesh in the lateral abdominal wall, leaving the skin above the iliac crest, in a place without risks of vascular, nerve, bowel injuries. We report in this article the results of the three main publications on the subject. The indications are cystocele and apical descent. It can be envisaged when the access of the promontory is difficult; for instance in the presence of obesity, adhesions, sigmoid megacolon, or low position of the left common iliac vein, partially covering the promontory. It is also a practical technique for surgeons having a moderate experience of the promontory access.

[Are there selection criteria between abdominal approach and vaginal route for genital prolapse surgical management?]

INTRODUCTION

The never ending debate over the surgical approach of genital prolapse repair (abdominal versus vaginal route) is as passionate as ever. The available literature may support a multidisciplinary analysis of our expert daily practice.

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to define selection criteria for surgical approach between abdominal and vaginal route in the management of genital prolapse by reviewing the literature.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Systematically review of the literature concerning comparative anatomical and functionnal results of surgery of pelvic organ prolaps by vaginal or abdominal route.

RESULTS

We were confronted to the lack of data in the literature, with few prospective randomized comparative studies. Many limitations were identified such as small populations in the studies, no description of sub-population, multiplicity of surgical procedures. Moreover, vaginal route was compared to sacral colpopexy by open abdominal approach, whereas laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy is now recommended. Only one prospective randomized comparative trial assessed laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and vaginal approach, in which was used a mesh withdrawn from the market.

CONCLUSION

The lack of available randomized trials makes it impossible to define HAS compliant guidelines on this topic. However, selection criteria for each surgical approach and technique were drawn from experts' advices. © 2016 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.

Comparison of functional outcomes with purely laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy in obese women

OBJECTIVE

To compare the functional outcomes and complication rates following laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LS) with those occurring in robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (RALSCP) in obese women.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A comparative retrospective multicentre study was made, involving 39 obese women (BMI≥30 kg/m2) who underwent LS, and 17 obese women who underwent RASCLP. The operative parameters (length of operation, associated procedures, complication rate and length of hospitalization) and the objective and subjective results were evaluated at 12 months follow-up.

RESULTS

The median (IQR) BMI was 30.5 kg/m2 (30-32) in the LS group vs 31.6 kg/m2 (30-34) in the RALSCP group (P=0.402). The anatomical results were comparable in both groups (LS vs RALSCP): post-operative stage of prolapse (POP-Q-ICS): stage 0-1: 34/39 (88%) vs 16/17 (94.1%), P=0.7; stage 2: 4/39 (10%) vs 0/17 (0%), P=0.7; stage 3-4: 1/39 (2%) vs 1/17 (5.9%), P=0.7. The complication rate was similar in both groups (LS vs RALSCP): bladder injury 2.5% (1/39) vs 0% (0/17), P=0.6, laparoconversion 5.1% (2/39) vs 5.9% (1/17), P=0.5. The overall reoperation rate was (LS vs RALSCP): 18% (7/39) vs 5.9% (1/17), P=0.4.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy have equal results in obese women. The complication rates and outcomes appear to be similar in both groups of obese women.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

[Transvaginal repair of genital prolapse using a light-weight mesh by the vaginal route]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the results associated with the transvaginal repair of genital prolapse using a tension free light-weight polypropylene mesh.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred and fifteen patients have been treated in a single centre. Pre-operative and operative data and complications were recorded. Patients were examined at 1, 6 and 12 months. Anatomical failure was defined as follows: Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) stage II or more.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven (67%) patients completed 6 months follow-up and 45 (39%) patients completed 12 months follow-up. Finally, 70 (61%) patients were lost to follow-up, including 2 deaths (not related to surgery). Mean age was 66 years. All patients were treated with an anterior and apical and 20 patients were additionally treated with a posterior mesh. Among the 77 patients who completed 6 months follow-up, the complications reported were: 2 (2%) bladder injuries, 1 (1%) hematoma, 1 (1%) bleeding>200 mL and 1 (1%) vaginal mesh exposure. At one year, 6 (7%) patients suffered from urinary stress incontinence, 5 (4%) suffered from urgency and 4 (5%) had dyspareunia. Among the 45 patients who completed 12 months follow-up, functional success was 95% and anatomical success was 77%.

CONCLUSION

In this series, the placement of a light-weight transvaginal polypropylene mesh was associated with good functional results and a moderate prevalence of complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.