Modern methods of treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: anterior and posterior compartments

• Mekan R. Orazov
• Liliya R. Toktar
• Milana S. Lologaeva
• Zarina N. Kamarova
• Mikhail V. Krestinin
• Irina A. Samsonova
• Verаnika E. Pak
• Kseniya I. Lee
• Dianna A. Gevorgyan

Abstract

Aim. To conduct a systematic analysis of the modern data available on the effectiveness of non-invasive and surgical treatment of pelvic floor failure.

Framework. Pelvic floor failure (PFF) is one of the most common gynecologic diseases, and, as the median age of the world population increases, it is soon to become a global concern. Pelvic floor prolapse (PFP) management is one of the most vividly discussed and debated topics in the international scientific community. Currently, surgical treatment is the method of choice for the majority of patients with PFF. However, due to the increasing incidence, conservative techniques that are aimed at maintaining the quality of life of women with initial forms of PFF and for those who are reluctant to resort to surgical option are becoming increasingly preferable. With the inevitable incidence increase, patient dissatisfaction with treatment outcomes, and the prevalence of recurrence, the need for a personalized approach to PFF management is becoming increasingly evident.

Conclusion. For many years there have been discussions about the causes of PFF and pelvic organ prolapse. Currently none of the many theories can fully explain the cause and mechanism of its development. Given the lack of a theory that gives a clear idea of the pathogenesis of PFF, treatment options are always aimed at eliminating the symptoms of prolapse and improving the quality of life, and not at prevention. There are a huge number of surgeries for treatment of the pelvic floor prolapse. The search for new surgical techniques with the use of auto- and allografts, the latest equipment and laparoscopic techniques continues.

In the modern world, the accumulated knowledge about the causes of prolapse of female genital organs, the pathogenesis of this disease, as well as treatment approach are chaotic, diverse, disjointed, contradictory and not systematized. Therefore, doctors do not have a comprehensive understanding of the diagnosis of these diseases and disorders, they do not always diagnose and take any measures to manage the initial forms of pelvic floor failure.

Keywords:cystocele; rectocele; vaginal wall prolapse

REFERENCES

1. Abhyankar P., et al. Women’s experiences of receiving care for pelvic organ prolapse: a qualitative study. BMC Womens. Health. 2019; 19 (1): 45.

2. Hong M.K., Ding D.C. Current treatments for female pelvic floor dysfunctions. Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther. 2019; 8 (4): 143-8.

3. Zhumanova E.N., Kolgaeva D.I., Muravlev A.I. The impact of BOS-therapy on the dynamics of sexual function in women of different ages, operated on with a diagnosis of prolapse of the posterior vaginal wall. Meditsina. Sotsiologiya. Filosofiya. Prikladnye issledovaniya [Medicine. Sociology. Philosophy. Applied Research]. 2018; (4): 33-6. (in Russian)

4. Wu Y.M., Welk B. Revisiting current treatment options for stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse: a contemporary literature review. Res Rep Urol. 2019; 11: 179-88.

5. Panman C.M., Wiegersma M., Kollen B.J., Burger H., Berger M.Y., Dekker J.H. Predictors of unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with prolapse: a cross-sectional study in general practice. Int Urogynecol J. 2017; 28 (2): 307-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3107-4 Epub 2016 Aug 15. PMID: 27525693; PMCID: PMC5306061.

6. Paquette J., et al. Real-world effectiveness of pelvic floor muscle training for women with urinary tract symptoms and/or prolapse. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2021; 43 (11): 1247-53.e1.

7. Turnbull J., et al. Vaginal pessaries for pelvic organ prolapse or stress urinary incontinence: a health technology assessment. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2021; 21 (3): 1-155.

8. Bugge C., et al. Pessaries (mechanical devices) for managing pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020: 11: CD004010.

9. Krutova V.A., Nadtochy A.V. Comparative prospective study of biofeedback therapy and neuromuscular electrical stimulation in rehabilitation of patients with pelvic floor dysfunctions. Sechenovskiy vestnik [Sechenov Bulletin]. 2019; 10 (3): 13-21. (in Russian)

10. Ahadi T., et al. Efficacy of biofeedback on quality of life in stages I and II pelvic organ prolapse: a pilot study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017; 215: 241-6.

11. Nadtochiy A.V., Krutova V.A., Gordon K.V., Filippov F.E. The importance of biofeedback and electric pulse stimulation of the pelvic floor muscles in the prevention of recurrent perineal ptosis in women in the menopause after surgical treatment (literature review). Sovremennye voprosy biomeditsiny [Modern Issues of Miomedicine]. 2021; 2 (15). (in Russian)

12. Enikeev M.E., Enikeev D.V., Korolev D.O., Snurnitsyna O.V., Lobanov M.V., Nikitin A.N., et al. Repair of cystocele and apical genital prolapse using 6-strap mesh implant. Urologia. 2020; 87 (3): 130-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/039156031989099 9 Epub 2019 Dec 16. PMID: 31841395.

13. Maher C., et al. Surgery for women with anterior compartment prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016; 11: CD004014.

14. Gillor M., Langer S., Dietz H.P. Long-term subjective, clinical and sonographic outcomes after native-tissue and mesh-augmented posterior colporrhaphy. Int Urogynecol J. 2019; 30 (9): 1581-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-03921-0

15. Sung V.W., et al. Porcine subintestinal submucosal graft augmentation for rectocele repair: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 119 (1): 125-33.

16. Brusciano L., et al. Technical aspect of stapled transanal rectal resection. From PPH-01 to contour to both: an optional combined approach to treat obstructed defecation? Dis Colon Rectum. 2015; 58 (8): 817-20.

17. Mascagni D., Panarese A., Eberspacher C., Grimaldi G., Pontone S., Sorrenti S., et al. Standard stapled transanal rectal resection versus stapled transanal rectal resection with one high-volume stapler to prevent complications in the elderly. Minerva Chir. 2020; 75 (2): 65-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23736/S0026-4733.18.07725-8 Epub 2019 Jan 4. PMID: 30620165.

18. Naldini G. Serious unconventional complications of surgery with stapler for haemorrhoidal prolapse and obstructed defaecation because of rectocoele and rectal intussusception. Colorectal Dis. 2011; 13 (3): 323-7.

19. Formijne Jonkers H.A., et al. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for rectal prolapse and symptomatic rectocele: an analysis of 245 consecutive patients. Colorectal Dis. 2013; 15 (6): 695-9.

20. Maher C., et al. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; 4: CD004014.

21. Abramov Y., et al. Site-specific rectocele repair compared with standard posterior colporrhaphy. Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 105 (2): 314-8.

22. Karram M., Maher C. Surgery for posterior vaginal wall prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2013; 24 (11): 1835-41.

All articles in our journal are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0 license)