Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Scores Improve After Prolapse Surgery Regardless of Surgical Approach but Not After Observation Alone
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
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.
