Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Scores Improve After Prolapse Surgery Regardless of Surgical Approach but Not After Observation Alone
- Additional Document Info
- View All
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of different surgical procedures on Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI) scores in women with pelvic organ prolapse. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women with prolapse were enrolled from 2008 to 2014. Baseline data and outcomes at 1 year were collected including subscales of the PFDI. Patients who had surgery (SGY) within the first year were compared to those who did not (N-SGY). Subanalyses of SGY included vaginal vs abdominal, with or without concurrent hysterectomy (HYST, N-HYST), placement of mesh (MESH, N-MESH), and concurrent posterior repair/perineorrhaphy (POST, N-POST). RESULTS: A total of 233/239 patients underwent surgery in the first year. For SGY vs N-SGY, SGY had significant improvements in PFDI and all subscale scores at 1 year while N-SGY did not. When comparing vaginal to abdominal approach, MESH to N-MESH and HYST to N-HYST, there were no differences between any scores at baseline or 1 year between the groups. However, all within group symptom scores improved from baseline to 1 year (P <.0001 for all). In comparing POST to N-POST, there were no differences between groups at 1 year in PFDI and Urogenital Distress Inventory and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory subscale scores. Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory scores were significantly higher at baseline for POST (P <.0001) but not at 1 year (P = 0.37). All within group scores statistically significant improved at 1 year. CONCLUSION: Women who underwent surgical repair for prolapse had significantly improved overall PFDI and subscale scores regardless of surgical approach and concurrent procedures.
has subject area