Pelvic organ prolapse: prevalence and risk factors in a Brazilian population

Pelvic organ prolapse is downward descent of female pelvic organs, including the bladder, uterus or post-hysterectomy vaginal cuff, and the small or large bowel, resulting in protrusion of the vagina, uterus, or both. Prolapse development is multifactorial, with vaginal child birth, advancing age, and increasing body-mass index as the most consistent risk factors. Vaginal delivery, hysterectomy, chronic straining, normal ageing, and abnormalities of connective tissue or connective-tissue repair predispose some women to disruption, stretching, or dysfunction of the levator ani complex, connective-tissue attachments of the vagina, or both, resulting in prolapse. Patients generally present with several complaints, including bladder, bowel, and pelvic symptoms; however, with the exception of vaginal bulging, none is specific to prolapse. Women with symptoms suggestive of prolapse should undergo a pelvic examination and medical history check. Radiographic assessment is usually unnecessary. Many women with pelvic organ prolapse are asymptomatic and do not need treatment. When prolapse is symptomatic, options include observation, pessary use, and surgery. Surgical strategies for prolapse can be categorised broadly by reconstructive and obliterative techniques. Reconstructive procedures can be done by either an abdominal or vaginal approach. Although no effective prevention strategy for prolapse has been identified, considerations include weight loss, reduction of heavy lifting, treatment of constipation, modification or reduction of obstetric risk factors, and pelvic-floor physical therapy.

To investigate the lifetime risk of first-time incident pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery with the intention of updating previous risk estimates that have been based on members of managed-care populations. Age-specific incidence rates of first-time prolapse surgery between 1981 and 2005 were calculated based on 44,728-incident cases. We estimated the lifetime risk as the cumulative incidence to age 85 years based on a life-table method and using the most recent cross-sectional incidence rates for the period 2001-2005. Age-standardized rates by calendar year were also calculated to show the secular trend in prolapse surgery. The lifetime risk of surgery for POP in the general female population was 19% based on the most recent cross-sectional rates, a figure higher than the 11-12% reported from U.S. managed-care populations. There is a relatively high likelihood that a woman in Western Australia will undergo surgery for POP during her lifetime. If, as our results suggest, the burden of genital prolapse in general populations is higher than previously thought, there is justification for a stronger evidence base for prevention, early detection and intervention to reduce the personal and societal costs of these gynecological conditions. II.

The aim was to determine the incidence and prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse surgery and describe how outcomes are reported. Every 4 years and as part of the Fifth International Collaboration on Incontinence we reviewed the English-language scientific literature after searching PubMed, Medline, Cochrane library and Cochrane database of systematic reviews, published up to January 2012. Publications were classified as level 1 evidence (randomised controlled trials [RCT] or systematic reviews, level 2 (poor quality RCT, prospective cohort studies), level 3 (case series or retrospective studies) and level 4 (case reports). The highest level of evidence was utilised by the committee to make evidence-based recommendations based upon the Oxford grading system. A grade A recommendation usually depends on consistent level 1 evidence. A grade B recommendation usually depends on consistent level 2 and/or 3 studies, or "majority evidence" from RCTs. A grade C recommendation usually depends on level 4 studies or "majority evidence" from level 2/3 studies or Delphi processed expert opinion. A grade D "no recommendation possible" would be used where the evidence is inadequate or conflicting and when expert opinion is delivered without a formal analytical process, such as by Delphi . Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) when defined by symptoms has a prevalence of 3-6% and up to 50% when based upon vaginal examination. Surgery for prolapse is performed twice as commonly as continence surgery and prevalence varies widely from 6 to 18%. The incidence of POP surgery ranges from 1.5 to 1.8 per 1,000 women years and peaks in women aged 60-69. When reporting outcomes of the surgical management of prolapse, authors should include a variety of standardised anatomical and functional outcomes. Anatomical outcomes reported should include all POP-Q points and staging, utilising a traditional definition of success with the hymen as the threshold for success. Assessment should be prospective and assessors blinded as to the surgical intervention performed if possible and without any conflict of interest related to the assessment undertaken (grade C). Subjective success postoperatively should be defined as the absence of a vaginal bulge (grade C). Functional outcomes are best reported using valid, reliable and responsive symptom questionnaires and condition-specific HRQOL instruments (grade C). Sexual function is best reported utilising validated condition-specific HRQOL that assess sexual function or validated sexual function questionnaires such as the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ) or the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). The sexual activity status of all study participants should be reported pre- and postoperatively under the following categories: sexually active without pain, sexually active with pain or not sexually active (grade C). Prolapse surgery should be defined as primary surgery, and repeat surgery sub-classified as primary surgery different site, repeat surgery, complications related to surgery and surgery for non-prolapse-related conditions (grade C). Significant variation exists in the prevalence and incidence of pelvic organ prolapse surgery and how the outcomes are reported. Much of the variation may be improved by standardisation of definitions and outcomes of reporting on pelvic organ prolapse surgery.