Cited by 28Pelvic floor disorders treatmentsSexual function and dysfunction studiesGynecological conditions and treatments

Vaginal Dilators for Prevention of Dyspareunia After Prolapse Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Antosh, Danielle D., Gutman, Robert E., Park, Amy J., Sokol, Andrew I., Peterson, Joanna L., Kingsberg, Sheryl A., Iglesia, Cheryl B.·2013·Obstetrics & Gynecology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare rates of de novo dyspareunia in women with and without vaginal dilator use after posterior colporrhaphy. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial included sexually active patients with prolapse and no bothersome baseline dyspareunia undergoing posterior colporrhaphy. Patients were randomized to daily vaginal dilator use from postoperative weeks 4 through 8 or to no dilator use. Pelvic organ prolapse quantification examination and vaginal caliber were measured at baseline, 8 weeks, and 6 months postoperatively. Sexual function was evaluated at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire-12. Participants completed a Patient Global Impression of Improvement at 3 months and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Sixty patients were randomized: 30 in the dilator group and 30 in the control group. There were no differences in baseline characteristics and postoperative vaginal caliber between groups. At 3 months, 9.5% of patients reported de novo dyspareunia in the dilator group compared with 19.2% of control patients (P=.44). At 6 months, 12.5% of patients in the dilator group reported de novo dyspareunia compared with 3.8% of control patients (P=.34). There was a 13% loss-to-follow-up rate, and therefore we did not meet appropriate power to detect a difference. There were no differences in overall sexual function or Patient Global Impression of Improvement scores between groups at 3 months and 6 months. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in de novo dyspareunia rates, overall postoperative sexual function scores, or global improvement scores between those using vaginal dilators compared with control patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/aog.0b013e3182932ce2

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Seven trials reported on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) (Antosh 2013; Arunachalam 2019; Barber 2014; Duarte 2020; Mueller 2017; Pauls 2013; Russo 2020).

    “Seven trials reported on PROMs (Antosh 2013; Arunachalam 2019; Barber 2014; Duarte 2020; Mueller 2017; Pauls 2013; Russo 2020).”

    From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Antosh 2013

  • At six months after POP surgery, there is probably no clinically relevant difference in quality of life or sexual function between women using a vaginal dilator and those not using one.

    “There may be no clinically relevant difference in quality of life or sexual function in women using a vaginal dilator versus no vaginal dilator six months following POP surgery.”

    From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Antosh 2013

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Antosh, D. D., Gutman, R. E., Park, A. J., Sokol, A. I., Peterson, J. L., Kingsberg, S. A., & Iglesia, C. B.
Affiliations
MedStar Washington Hospital Center (US)
Venue
Obstetrics & Gynecology
Published
2013-06
Volume
121
Issue
6
Pages
1273-1280
ISSN
0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2001721073
Cited by
28
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.82
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 › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gynecological conditions and treatments
Keywords
vaginal dilators, dyspareunia, posterior colporrhaphy, pelvic organ prolapse, postoperative sexual function, pelvic organ prolapse surgery
MeSH terms
Adult, Dyspareunia, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Gynecologic Surgical Procedures, Uterine 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