Effect of Vaginal Mesh Hysteropexy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy With Uterosacral Ligament Suspension on Treatment Failure in Women With Uterovaginal Prolapse: A Randomized Clinical Trial

(Abstracted from JAMA 2019;322:1054–1065) Two surgical options for patients with uterovaginal prolapse are vaginal hysterectomy with suture apical suspension or transvaginal mesh hysteropexy, a uterine preservation procedure. An analysis of a US database from 2007 to 2011 estimated that 13% of women underwent pelvic organ prolapse surgery by the age of 80 years.

[1]  E. Balk,et al.  Uterine preservation vs hysterectomy in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a systematic review with meta‐analysis and clinical practice guidelines , 2018, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[2]  K. Broglio.  Randomization in Clinical Trials: Permuted Blocks and Stratification. , 2018, JAMA.

[3]  C. Raker,et al.  Trends in Hysteropexy and Apical Support for Uterovaginal Prolapse in the United States from 2002 to 2012 , 2017, Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery.

[4]  G. Cundiff,et al.  Vaginal and laparoscopic mesh hysteropexy for uterovaginal prolapse: a parallel cohort study , 2017, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[5]  K. Sivanesan,et al.  Sacrospinous hysteropexy: review and meta-analysis of outcomes , 2017, International Urogynecology Journal.

[6]  J. Norrie,et al.  Mesh, graft, or standard repair for women having primary transvaginal anterior or posterior compartment prolapse surgery: two parallel-group, multicentre, randomised, controlled trials (PROSPECT) , 2017, The Lancet.

[7]  Julie Brown,et al.  Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse. , 2016, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[8]  M. Barber,et al.  The Design of a Randomized Trial of Vaginal Surgery for Uterovaginal Prolapse: Vaginal Hysterectomy With Native Tissue Vault Suspension Versus Mesh Hysteropexy Suspension (The Study of Uterine Prolapse Procedures Randomized Trial) , 2016, Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery.

[9]  K. Kluivers,et al.  Sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy with suspension of the uterosacral ligaments in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: multicentre randomised non-inferiority trial , 2015, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[10]  P. Culligan,et al.  A multicenter, prospective trial to evaluate mesh-augmented sacrospinous hysteropexy for uterovaginal prolapse , 2014, International Urogynecology Journal.

[11]  Jennifer M Wu,et al.  Lifetime Risk of Stress Urinary Incontinence or Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery , 2014, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[12]  E. Lukacz,et al.  Comparison of 2 transvaginal surgical approaches and perioperative behavioral therapy for apical vaginal prolapse: the OPTIMAL randomized trial. , 2014, JAMA.

[13]  V. Sung,et al.  Patient preferences for uterine preservation and hysterectomy in women with pelvic organ prolapse. , 2013, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[14]  E. Lukacz,et al.  The PISQ-IR: considerations in scale scoring and development , 2013, International Urogynecology Journal.

[15]  E. Lukacz,et al.  A new measure of sexual function in women with pelvic floor disorders (PFD): the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire, IUGA-Revised (PISQ-IR) , 2013, International Urogynecology Journal.

[16]  W. Ye,et al.  Validation of the Surgical Pain Scales in Women Undergoing Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery , 2012, Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery.

[17]  R. Goldberg,et al.  Minimal mesh repair for apical and anterior prolapse: initial anatomical and subjective outcomes , 2012, International Urogynecology Journal.

[18]  S. Jha,et al.  The UK National Prolapse Survey: 10 years on , 2011, International Urogynecology Journal.

[19]  S. Hagen,et al.  Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. , 2013, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[20]  Y. van der Graaf,et al.  One-year follow-up after sacrospinous hysteropexy and vaginal hysterectomy for uterine descent: a randomized study , 2009, International Urogynecology Journal.

[21]  C. H. van der Vaart,et al.  Vaginal surgery for uterine descent; which options do we have? A review of the literature , 2009, International Urogynecology Journal.

[22]  C. Bradley,et al.  Vaginal Descent and Pelvic Floor Symptoms in Postmenopausal Women: A Longitudinal Study , 2008, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[23]  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.

[24]  L. Neumayer,et al.  Assessment of patient functional status after surgery. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[25]  R. Bump,et al.  Validation of two global impression questionnaires for incontinence. , 2003, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[26]  C. Pieper,et al.  Psychometric evaluation of 2 comprehensive condition-specific quality of life instruments for women with pelvic floor disorders. , 2001, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[27]  Penny Hopwood,et al.  A body image scale for use with cancer patients. , 2001, European journal of cancer.

[28]  H. Sandvik,et al.  A severity index for epidemiological surveys of female urinary incontinence: Comparison with 48‐hour pad‐weighing tests , 2000, Neurourology and urodynamics.

[29]  I S Chan,et al.  Test‐Based Exact Confidence Intervals for the Difference of Two Binomial Proportions , 1999, Biometrics.

[30]  Jon A. Wellner,et al.  A Hybrid Algorithm for Computation of the Nonparametric Maximum Likelihood Estimator from Censored Data , 1997 .

[31]  J Sun,et al.  A non-parametric test for interval-censored failure time data with application to AIDS studies. , 1996, Statistics in medicine.

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

[33]  Tosiya Sato,et al.  On the variance estimator for the Mantel-Haenszel risk difference , 1989 .