Cited by 290Pelvic floor disorders treatmentsUterine Myomas and TreatmentsUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research

Epidemiologic evaluation of reoperation for surgically treated pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence

Clark, Amanda L, Gregory, Thomas, Smith, Virginia J, Edwards, Renee·2003·American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abstract

Objective The purpose of this study was to measure the risk of reoperation for surgically treated pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence in a community-based population.Study design A 5-year prospective, observational study was conducted of women who had undergone pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence surgery in 1995. The cohort of 376 women was identified by International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, and current procedural terminology codes in 149,554 reproductive-aged women within the Kaiser Permanente Northwest membership.Results Thirty-six women underwent 40 cases of reoperation. By survival analysis, 13% of women underwent reoperation by 71 months. Having undergone previous pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence surgery increased the risk of reoperation to 17% compared with 12% for women who underwent a first procedure (log rank, P=.04). No association was observed with age, body mass index, parity, previous hysterectomy not for prolapse, vaginal versus abdominal approach, severity of prolapse, ethnicity, chronic lung disease, smoking, previous corticosteroid use, and estrogen status.Conclusions Future reoperation is a significant risk of morbidity for women who undergo pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence surgery.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1067/s0002-9378(03)00829-9

Cites

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 15 · Cited by 290

Authors
Clark, A. L., Gregory, T., Smith, V. J., & Edwards, R.
Affiliations
Kaiser Permanente (US)
Corresponding author
Clark, Amanda L
Venue
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-11
Volume
189
Issue
5
Pages
1261-1267
ISSN
0002-9378 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1980470456
Cited by
290
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 28
FWCI
2.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Uterine Myomas and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Keywords
pelvic organ prolapse, urinary incontinence, reoperation, surgical complications, pelvic floor surgery, postoperative morbidity, risk factors, women's health
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Recurrence, Reoperation, Urinary Incontinence, Uterine Prolapse, Cohort Studies, Survival Analysis, Risk Assessment

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