Natural History of Pelvic Organ Prolapse in Postmenopausal Women

OBJECTIVE: To describe the natural history of pelvic organ prolapse and risk factors for changes in vaginal descent in older women. METHODS: This 4-year prospective observational study included 259 postmenopausal women with a uterus enrolled at one Women’s Health Initiative clinical site who completed at least two annual pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) examinations. We calculated 1-year and 3-year incidence and resolution risks for prolapse (defined as maximal vaginal descent to or beyond the hymen) and estimated progression and regression rates (1 cm or greater and 2 cm or greater changes in maximal vaginal descent) and risk factors. RESULTS: Mean age was 68.1±5.5 years, and median vaginal parity was 4. Seventy-three (28%) women had four exams, 128 (49%) had three exams, and 58 (22%) had two exams. Prolapse waxed and waned yearly in individual women. Overall 1-year and 3-year prolapse incidences were 26% (95% confidence interval [CI] 20–33%) and 40% (95% CI 26–56%); 1-year and 3-year prolapse resolution risks were 21% (95% CI 11–33%) and 19% (95% CI 7–39%). Rates of any change in maximal vaginal descent over time varied depending on baseline measurements. Over 3 years, the maximal vaginal descent increased by at least 2 cm in 11.0% (95% CI 4.9–20.5%) of the women and decreased by at least 2 cm in 2.7% (95% CI 0.3–9.5%). Increasing body mass index and grand multiparity increased the risk for vaginal descent progression. CONCLUSION: Prolapse progresses and regresses in older women, although rates of vaginal descent progression are slightly greater than regression overall. Obesity is a risk factor for progression in vaginal descent. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III

[1]  C. Bradley,et al.  Vaginal Wall Descensus and Pelvic Floor Symptoms in Older Women , 2005, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[2]  S. Swift Pelvic organ prolapse: is it time to define it? , 2005, International Urogynecology Journal.

[3]  A. O'Boyle,et al.  Pelvic Organ Support Study (POSST): the distribution, clinical definition, and epidemiologic condition of pelvic organ support defects. , 2005, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[4]  C. Bradley,et al.  Pelvic Organ Prolapse in Older Women: Prevalence and Risk Factors , 2004, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[5]  Charles Kooperberg,et al.  Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results From the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. , 2002, JAMA.

[6]  S. Swift,et al.  The distribution of pelvic organ support in a population of female subjects seen for routine gynecologic health care. , 2000, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[7]  B. Everitt,et al.  Analysis of longitudinal data , 1998, British Journal of Psychiatry.

[8]  J. Colling,et al.  Epidemiology of Surgically Managed Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Urinary Incontinence , 1997, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[9]  Robert L. Harris,et al.  Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the proposed International Continence Society, Society of Gynecologic Surgeons, and American Urogynecologic Society pelvic organ prolapse classification system. , 1996, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[10]  L. Brubaker,et al.  The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. , 1996, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[11]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[12]  E. Garrett,et al.  Progression and remission of pelvic organ prolapse: a longitudinal study of menopausal women. , 2004, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[13]  L. Meyn,et al.  Procedures for pelvic organ prolapse in the United States, 1979-1997. , 2003, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.