Cited by 140Pelvic floor disorders treatmentsMenopause: Health Impacts and TreatmentsUterine Myomas and Treatments

Effect of weight change on natural history of pelvic organ prolapse

Open access
Kudish, Bela I., Iglesia, Cheryl B., Sokol, Robert J., Cochrane, Barbara, Richter, Holly E., Larson, Joseph, Hendrix, Susan L., Howard, Barbara V.·2009·Obstetrics & Gynecology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between change in weight and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) progression/regression in women during a 5-year period. METHODS: Postmenopausal women with uteri (N=16,608), ages 50 to 79, who were enrolled in the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) Estrogen plus Progestin Clinical Trial between 1993 and 1998 were included in this secondary analysis. Baseline pelvic examination, repeated annually, assessed uterine prolapse, cystocele, and rectocele using the WHI Prolapse Classification System. Statistical analyses included univariate and multiple logistic regression methods. RESULTS: During the 5-year time period, the majority of women (9,251, 55.7%) gained weight (mean 4.43 kg, +/-5.95 kg), and the overall rate of prolapse (WHI Prolapse Classification System: grades 1-3) increased from 40.9% at baseline to 43.8% at year 5 of evaluation. Controlling for age, parity, race, and other health/physical variables, being overweight (body mass index [BMI] between 25 and 29.9) or obese (BMI of at least 30) at baseline was associated with progression in cystocele, rectocele, and uterine prolapse compared with women with healthy BMIs (BMI is calculated as weight (kg)/[height (m)]). Specifically, the risk of prolapse progression in overweight and obese women as compared with the participants with healthy BMIs increased by 32% and 48% for cystocele, by 37% and 58% for rectocele, and by 43% and 69% for uterine prolapse, respectively. Adjusting for women with prolapse at baseline and baseline BMI, a 10% weight change was associated with minimal change in overall POP. Specifically, a 10% weight loss was associated with a borderline worsening of uterine prolapse (odds ratio [OR] 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-0.97) and a minimal regression of cystocele (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00-1.05) and rectocele (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.07). CONCLUSION: Being overweight or obese is associated with progression of POP. Weight loss does not appear to be significantly associated with regression of POP, suggesting that damage to the pelvic floor related to weight gain might be irreversible. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/aog.0b013e318190a0dd

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [13]Velasquez-Melendez G Kac G Valente JG Tavares R Silva CQ Garcia ES Evaluation of waist circumference to predict general obesity and arterial hypertension in women in Greater Metropolitan Belo Horizonte, Brazil Cad Saude Publica 2002 18 765 71 12048602

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kudish, B. I., Iglesia, C. B., Sokol, R. J., Cochrane, B., Richter, H. E., Larson, J., Hendrix, S. L., & Howard, B. V.
Affiliations
  • MedStar Washington Hospital Center (US)
  • Wayne State University (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
  • Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US)
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • Georgetown University (US)
Corresponding author
Kudish, Bela I.
Venue
Obstetrics & Gynecology
Published
2009-01
Volume
113
Issue
1
Pages
81-88
ISSN
0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1976275032
Cited by
140
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
FWCI
7.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (n01wh22110-38-0-0, N01 WH022110)
  • U.S. Public Health Service (44221, 32122, 24152, 42107-26, 42129-32, 32118-32119, 32100-2, 32105-6, 32108-9, 32111-13, 32115)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K24DK068389)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Menopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Uterine Myomas and Treatments
Keywords
pelvic organ prolapse, weight change, weight gain, weight loss, obesity, overweight, body mass index, uterine prolapse, cystocele, rectocele, postmenopausal women, estrogen plus progestin
MeSH terms
Aged, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Obesity, Remission, Spontaneous, Risk Factors, Uterine Prolapse, Weight Gain, Weight Loss, Body Mass Index, Postmenopause, Disease Progression, Rectocele, Cystocele

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