Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantifi cation Accuracy for Elongasio Cervix Diagnose in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Patients

Objective: To know sensitivity, specifi city and accuracy of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantifi cation (POP-Q) to measure cervical length for cervical elongation diagnose in Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) patients with gold standard was the anatomical cervical length from hysterectomy result. Methods: Diagnosis research, cross-sectional, consecutive sampling. POP-Q was taken before the operation and the anatomical cervical length was from hysterectomy result. Results: Sixty six subject, 1.5% 2nd stage POP, 45.5% 3rd stage POP, and 53.0 % 4th stage POP. Mean (± sd) age and body mass index consecutively 59.88 years (± 9.347) and 24.41 (± 3.67) kg/m2. Median (min-max) cervical length POP-Q and anatomy consecutively 4 cm (1-12) and 5 cm (3-10). Sensitivity, Specifi city dan Accuracy POP-Q consecutively 79%, 58% dan 68%. Conclusions: POP-Q has good specifi city (79%) but with less sensitivity (58%) with accuracy 68% to diagnose cervical elongation in POP.

[1]  H. Konar,et al.  DC Dutta's Textbook of Gynecology , 2019 .

[2]  L. Rosen,et al.  Putting POP-Q to the test: does C − D = cervical length? , 2018, International Urogynecology Journal.

[3]  K. Kluivers,et al.  Risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse and its recurrence: a systematic review , 2015, International Urogynecology Journal.

[4]  Begüm Z. Özel,et al.  Comparison of the POP-Q examination, transvaginal ultrasound, and direct anatomic measurement of cervical length , 2014, International Urogynecology Journal.

[5]  A. Yeniel,et al.  How do delivery mode and parity affect pelvic organ prolapse? , 2013, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica.

[6]  K. Guire,et al.  Is cervical elongation associated with pelvic organ prolapse? , 2012, International Urogynecology Journal.

[7]  R. Goldberg.  Prolapse of the Uterus: Epidemiology and Treatments , 2010 .

[8]  T. Nolan,et al.  Hypertrophic cervical elongation: clinical and histological correlations , 2010, International Urogynecology Journal.

[9]  S. Bertozzi,et al.  Transvaginal ultrasonographic measurement of cervical and uterine size in varying uterine versions/flexions , 2010 .

[10]  M. Eijkemans,et al.  Prediction model and prognostic index to estimate clinically relevant pelvic organ prolapse in a general female population , 2009, International Urogynecology Journal.

[11]  B. Vakili,et al.  Comparison of Estimated Cervical Length From the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification Exam and Actual Cervical Length at Hysterectomy: Can We Accurately Determine Cervical Elongation? , 2009 .

[12]  R. Freeman,et al.  An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction , 2010, International Urogynecology Journal.

[13]  J. Jelovsek,et al.  Women seeking treatment for advanced pelvic organ prolapse have decreased body image and quality of life. , 2006, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[14]  Yeou-Lih Wang,et al.  Risk factors for failure of transvaginal sacrospinous uterine suspension in the treatment of uterovaginal prolapse. , 2005, Journal of the Formosan Medical Association = Taiwan yi zhi.

[15]  A. McTiernan,et al.  Pelvic organ prolapse in the Women's Health Initiative: gravity and gravidity. , 2002, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[16]  Homa Keshavarz,et al.  Hysterectomy surveillance -- United States 1994-1999. , 2002 .

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

[18]  T. Bader,et al.  The Accuracy of Digital Examination and Ultrasound in the Evaluation of Cervical Length , 1992, Obstetrics and gynecology.