Porcine Dermis Compared With Polypropylene Mesh for Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy : A Randomized Controlled Trial

This article presents a standard system of terminology recently approved by the International Continence Society, the American Urogynecologic Society, and the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons for the description of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. An objective site-specific system for describing, quantitating, and staging pelvic support in women is included. It has been developed to enhance both clinical and academic communication regarding individual patients and populations of patients. Clinicians and researchers caring for women with pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction are encouraged to learn and use the system.

To develop short forms of 2 valid and reliable condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with disorders of the pelvic floor including urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, and fecal incontinence (Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire). Data from the 100 women who contributed to the development and validation of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire long forms were used to develop the short-form questionnaires. All subsets regression analysis was used to find the items in each scale that best predicted the scale score on the respective long form. When different items appeared equivalent, a choice was made on item content. After development, the short forms and the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire long forms were administered preoperatively to 45 women with pelvic floor disorders scheduled to undergo surgery to evaluate the correlation between short and long forms in a second independent population. The short forms were readministered 3 to 6 months postoperatively to assess the responsiveness of the instruments. The short-form version of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory has a total of 20 questions and 3 scales (Urinary Distress Inventory, Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory, and Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory). Each short-form scale demonstrates significant correlation with their long-form scales (r=.86, r=.92, and r=.93, respectively, P<.0001). For the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire short form, the previously developed short form for the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-7 was used as a template. The 7 items identified in the previously developed Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-7 short form correlate highly with the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire long form (r=.96, P<.0001) as well as the long forms of the Colorectal-Anal Impact Questionnaire scale (r=.96, P<.0001) and the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Impact Questionnaire (r=.94, P<.0001). All subsets regression analysis did not identify any items or combination of items that correlated substantially better for any of the 3 scales. The scales of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7 maintained their excellent correlation to the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire long forms in the second independent sample (r=.88 to .94 for scales of Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20; r=.95 to .96 for scales of Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7, P<.0001 for all). The test-retest reliability of each scale was good to excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.70 to 0.93, P<.001 for all scales). The scales and summary scores of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7 demonstrated moderate to excellent responsiveness 3 to 6 months after surgery. The Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7 are valid, reliable, and responsive short forms of 2 condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders.

The purpose of this study was to describe the distribution of pelvic organ support in a gynecologic clinic population to define the clinical disease state of pelvic organ prolapse and to analyze its epidemiologic condition. This was a multicenter observational study. Subjects who were seen at outpatient gynecology clinics who required an annual gynecologic examination underwent a pelvic organ prolapse quantification examination and completed a prolapse symptom questionnaire. Receiver operator characteristic curves were used to define pelvic organ prolapse with the use of symptoms and pelvic organ prolapse quantification examination measures. Standard age-adjusted univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used to evaluate various relationships. The population consisted of 1004 women who were aged 18 to 83 years. The prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse quantification stages was 24% (stage 0), 38% (stage 1), 35% (stage 2), and 2% (stage 3). The definition of pelvic organ prolapse that was determined by the receiver operator characteristic curve was the leading edge of their vaginal wall that was -0.5 cm above the hymenal remnants. Multivariate analysis revealed age, Hispanic race, increasing body mass index, and the increasing weight of the vaginally delivered fetus as risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse, as defined in this population. The results from this population suggest that there is a bell-shaped distribution of pelvic organ support in a gynecologic clinic population. Advancing age, Hispanic race, increasing body mass index, and the increasing weight of the vaginally delivered fetus have the strongest correlations with prolapse.