Epidemiologic evaluation of reoperation for surgically treated pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Recurrence in a new compartment may be explained by redistribution of forces to other compartments after the primary operation.
“This could be explained by the concept of redistribution of forces to other compartments after the primary operation, which predisposes them to prolapse [7, 12, 14].”
From Risk factors for recurrence of pelvic organ prolapse after vaginal surgery among Ugandan women: a prospective cohort study (2022) · cites this paper as [14]
Reported recurrence rates after POP surgery vary widely, from 13% to 58% depending on follow-up duration and definition.
“The recurrence rates seem to differ from one study to another. Whiteside et al. [12] reported a recurrence rate of 58% after 1 year of follow-up, whereas in studies where the follow-up period was 5 years, recurrence was between 13 and 31% [13, 14]. Another study found a recurrence rate of 25% after a 10-year retrospective follow-up [15].”
From Risk factors for recurrence of pelvic organ prolapse after vaginal surgery among Ugandan women: a prospective cohort study (2022) · cites this paper as [14]
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
- ORCID
- 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
- Licence
- 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