Vaginal Prolapse Recurrence After Uterosacral Ligament Suspension in Normal-Weight Compared With Overweight and Obese Women
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare recurrent prolapse after vaginal uterosacral ligament suspension in normal-weight compared with overweight or obese women. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of the risk of recurrent prolapse after uterosacral ligament suspension in normal-weight compared with overweight or obese women at our institution from December 1, 1996, through June 30, 2011. Women with fewer than 6 months of follow-up and those with a prior vault suspension were excluded. Our primary outcome was a composite measure defined as anterior, posterior, or apical prolapse recurrence extending beyond the hymen or repeat treatment for prolapse with surgery or a pessary in women undergoing uterosacral ligament suspension and other vaginal repairs. RESULTS: We included 219 participants (81 [37%] normal-weight and 138 [63%] overweight or obese women). There was no difference in median follow-up (14 months; interquartile range 8.5-26.5 months] in the normal-weight compared with 13 months [interquartile range 9.0-29.0 months] in the overweight or obese women, P=.98). Prolapse recurred in 22.2% (n=18) of the normal-weight group and 26.1% (n=36) of the overweight or obese group (P=.52). Surgery for recurrent prolapse was performed in 16.0% (n=13) of the normal-weight women and in 14.5% (n=20) of the overweight or obese women (P=.76). The most common site of recurrence was the anterior compartment (17.4% [n=38]) compared with the apical compartment (8.7% [n=19]) or posterior compartment (6.8% [n=15]) with no significant difference between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: After uterosacral ligament suspension, overweight or obese women have similar prolapse recurrence compared with normal-weight women. Anterior prolapse is the most common site of recurrence after uterosacral ligament suspension.
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?
The risk of subsequent reoperation for posthysterectomy vault prolapse is between 4.6% and 18%.
“The risk of subsequent reoperation for posthysterectomy vault prolapse is between 4.6% and 18% [6, 7].”
From Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy and apical suspension: 7-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial (2022) · cites this paper as [7]
Cites
Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence
OLSEN, A., SMITH, V, BERGSTROM, J., COLLING, J., & CLARK, A. (1997) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(97)00058-6 · Cited by 3,335 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Risk factors for prolapse recurrence: systematic review and meta-analysis
Friedman, T., Eslick, G. D., & Dietz, H. P. (2018) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-017-3475-4 · Cited by 222 · see citing works
Obesity and pelvic organ prolapse
Lee, U. J., Kerkhof, M. H., van Leijsen, S. A., & Heesakkers, J. P. (2017) · Current Opinion in Urology · doi:10.1097/mou.0000000000000428 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
Risk factors for the recurrence of pelvic organ prolapse: a meta-analysis
Shi, W., & Guo, L. (2023) · Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology · doi:10.1080/01443615.2022.2160929 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Izett-Kay, M. L., Aldabeeb, D., Kupelian, A. S., Cartwright, R., Cutner, A. S., Jackson, S., Price, N., & Vashisht, A. (2020) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-020-04396-0 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Izett-Kay, M. L., Rahmanou, P., Cartwright, R. J., Price, N., & Jackson, S. R. (2022) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-021-04932-6 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Pedersen, K. D., Storkholm, M. H., Bek, K. M., Glavind-Kristensen, M., & Greisen, S. (2019) · BMC Women's Health · doi:10.1186/s12905-019-0800-8 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Pelvic organ prolapse recurrence after apical prolapse repair: does obesity matter?
Metcalfe, N. D., Shandley, L. M., Young, M. R., Higgins, M., Abanulo, C., & Northington, G. M. (2022) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-021-04806-x · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Effects of Obesity on Urogynecologic Prolapse Surgery Outcomes
Ringel, N. E., Lenger, S. M., High, R., Alas, A., Houlihan, S., Chang, O. H., Pennycuff, J., Singh, R., White, A., Lipitskaia, L., et al. (2024) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000005525 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Hafedh, B., Idris, S., Nadreen, F., Banasser, A., Iskandarani, R., & Baradwan, S. (2024) · International Journal of Women's Health · doi:10.2147/ijwh.s474835 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Edenfield, A. L., Amundsen, C. L., Weidner, A. C., Wu, J. M., George, A., & Siddiqui, N. Y.
- Affiliations
- Duke University (US)
- Venue
- Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Published
- 2013-03
- Volume
- 121
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 554-559
- ISSN
- 0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1979367272
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 2.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- 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 › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Ureteral procedures and complications
- Keywords
- vaginal prolapse, uterosacral ligament suspension, prolapse recurrence, obesity, overweight, body weight, cystocele, apical prolapse, pelvic organ prolapse surgery
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Female, Humans, Ligaments, Middle Aged, Obesity, Recurrence, Retrospective Studies, Uterine Prolapse, Overweight, Kaplan-Meier Estimate
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