How accurate is preoperative evaluation of pelvic organ prolapse in women undergoing vaginal reconstruction surgery?
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the differences between the in-office and intraoperative techniques used to evaluate pelvic organ prolapse. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study included 25 women undergoing vaginal reconstruction surgery including vaginal hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse. The outp...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2012-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3467242?pdf=render |
| Summary: | OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the differences between the in-office and intraoperative techniques used to evaluate pelvic organ prolapse. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study included 25 women undergoing vaginal reconstruction surgery including vaginal hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse. The outpatient pelvic and site-specific vaginal examination was performed in the lithotomy position with the Valsalva maneuver. Repeated intraoperative examination was performed under general anesthesia with standard mild cervical traction. The Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system (POPQ) was used for both measurements and staging. The values found under the two conditions were compared. RESULTS: The intraoperative POPQ-measurements values were significantly higher than the outpatient values for apical wall prolapse in 17/25 (68%) women and for anterior wall prolapse in 8/25 (32%) women. There was not a significant difference in the posterior wall where increase in staging was shown in 3/25 (12%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians and patients should be alert to the possibility that pelvic organ measurements performed under general anesthesia with mild traction may be different from preoperative evaluation. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1932-6203 |