Cited by 25Pelvic floor disorders treatmentsUterine Myomas and TreatmentsUreteral procedures and complications

Functional outcome after pelvic floor reconstructive surgery with or without concomitant hysterectomy

Farthmann, Juliane, Watermann, Dirk, Erbes, Thalia, Roth, Katrin, Nanovska, Petia, Gitsch, Gerald, Gabriel, Boris·2015·Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Abstract

Purpose When counseling patients about surgical alternatives for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair, numerous things have to be considered. Uterine preservation vs. hysterectomy is one relevant issue. Hysterectomy has been traditionally performed for POP, but its benefit regarding outcome has never been proven. Furthermore, a growing number of women ask for uterine preservation.Methods In this retrospective cohort study, 384 patients who had undergone surgery for POP between 2000 and 2012 at Freiburg University Medical Center were included. Using a standardized questionnaire, further surgeries, urinary incontinence, recurrent POP, pessary use, and satisfaction with the surgical outcome were evaluated. The functional results after uterine preservation vs. concomitant hysterectomy were compared using t test.Results 196 (51.04%) women were available for follow-up and agreed to participate (n = 122 with hysterectomy, n = 72 with uterine-preserving surgery, respectively). After a mean follow-up time of 67 months, vaginal bulge symptoms and urinary incontinence did not differ between treatment groups. We observed higher success rates and satisfaction scores in the uterine-preserving group. Regarding satisfaction with surgery and whether the patients thought it had been successful, we observed a trend toward better results in the uterine-preserving group (mean satisfaction score: 8.45 ± 2.15 vs. 7.76 ± 2.91, range 0-10, p = 0.061; success: 91.4 vs. 81.7 %, p = 0.087).Conclusions There was no difference with regard to functional outcome between patients with or without concomitant hysterectomy. Satisfaction with the operation was slightly higher after uterus preserving surgery. Therefore, uterine-preserving surgery is a valuable option unless there are contraindications.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00404-014-3435-x

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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
Farthmann, J., Watermann, D., Erbes, T., Roth, K., Nanovska, P., Gitsch, G., & Gabriel, B.
Affiliations
  • University of Freiburg (DE)
  • Evangelisches Diakoniekrankenhaus (DE)
Corresponding author
Farthmann, Juliane
Venue
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
Published
2014-09-09
Volume
291
Issue
3
Pages
573-577
ISSN
  • 0003-9128 (ISSN-L)
  • 0932-0067
  • 1432-0711
OpenAlex
W2082378662
Cited by
25
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
FWCI
2.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • FreiDok plus (Universitätsbibliothek Freiburg) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Uterine Myomas and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Ureteral procedures and complications
Keywords
pelvic organ prolapse, pelvic floor reconstruction, hysterectomy, uterine preservation, concomitant hysterectomy, functional outcome, patient satisfaction, urinary incontinence, recurrent pelvic organ prolapse
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Humans, Hysterectomy, Middle Aged, Pessaries, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Retrospective Studies, Urinary Incontinence, Uterus, Treatment Outcome, Pelvic Floor, Plastic Surgery Procedures, 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