Cited by 21Pelvic floor disorders treatmentsUterine Myomas and TreatmentsHernia repair and management

Factors involved in prolapse recurrence one year after anterior vaginal repair

Open access
Diez-Itza, Irene, Avila, Marisa, Uranga, Sabiñe, Belar, Maria, Lekuona, Arantza, Martin, Alicia·2020·International Urogynecology Journal

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis The aim of this study was to identify which factors are associated with anatomic and symptomatic prolapse recurrence in the anterior compartment 1 year after traditional anterior vaginal repair. Our study hypothesis was that major defects in pelvic floor support structures before surgery are associated with higher recurrence rates. Methods This was a prospective multicenter study including women with symptomatic anterior compartment prolapse who underwent primary vaginal surgery. Prolapse examination was performed using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) system, prolapse symptoms were described using the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory short form (PFDI-20), and levator ani avulsion and hiatal area were identified by translabial 3D ultrasonography. Results During the inclusion period, 455 patients were recruited and 442 (97.1%) attended the 1-year follow-up. In three cases, ultrasound data were not available, and the remaining 439 formed the study group. Anatomic and symptomatic recurrence rates were 45.1% and 6.8%, respectively. Levator avulsion increased the risk of anatomic (OR: 1.96) and symptomatic (OR: 2.60) recurrence; abnormal distensibility of the levator hiatal area increased the risk of anatomic (OR: 2.51) and symptomatic (OR: 2.43) recurrence; advanced prolapse increased the risk of anatomic recurrence: POP-Q stage 3 (OR: 2.34) and POP-Q stage 4 (OR: 5.47). Conclusions Major defects in pelvic floor support structures before surgery are associated with higher recurrence rates 1 year after native tissue vaginal repair. Advanced stage of prolapse increases the risk of anatomic recurrence, while levator avulsion and abnormal distensibility of the levator hiatus area increase the risk of both anatomic and symptomatic recurrence.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00192-020-04468-1

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Diez-Itza, I., Avila, M., Uranga, S., Belar, M., Lekuona, A., & Martin, A.
Affiliations
  • Donostiako Unibertsitate Ospitalea (ES)
  • University of the Basque Country (ES)
Venue
International Urogynecology Journal
Published
2020-08-05
Volume
31
Issue
10
Pages
2027-2034
ISSN
  • 0937-3462 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-3023
OpenAlex
W3047103838
Cited by
21
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1
FWCI
1.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Urogynecology Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Communities in ADDI (University of the Basque Country) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Hispana (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Uterine Myomas and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hernia repair and management
Keywords
pelvic organ prolapse, prolapse recurrence, levator ani avulsion, POP-Q staging, pelvic floor support, pelvic floor distress
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Prospective Studies, Gynecologic Surgical Procedures, Ultrasonography, Vagina, Pelvic Floor, Pelvic Organ Prolapse

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review