Delivery mode and pelvic organ prolapse

a retrospective observational study

G. Trutnovsky, Ixora Kamisan @ Atan, A. Martin, H. P. Dietz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To analyse the associations between delivery mode and symptoms and signs of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in a cohort of symptomatic women. Design: Retrospective observational study. Population: A total of 1258 consecutive women attending a tertiary urogynaecological unit for the investigation of lower urinary tract or pelvic floor disorders between January 2012 and December 2014. Methods: Obstetric history and clinical examination data were obtained from the unit database. Prolapse quantification on imaging was performed using stored four-dimensional translabial ultrasound volume data sets. Women were grouped into four groups according to the most traumatic delivery reported. The presence of symptoms and signs of POP were compared between delivery groups while controlling for potential confounders. Main outcome measures: Prolapse symptoms, visual analogue score for prolapse bother, International Continence Society Prolapse Quantification System findings and ultrasound findings of anterior, central and posterior compartment descent. Results: Nulliparae showed the lowest prevalence of most measures of POP, followed by women exclusively delivered by caesarean section. Highest prevalences were consistently found in women delivered at least once by forceps, although the differences between this group and women delivered by normal vaginal delivery and/or vacuum extraction were significant in three out of eight measures only. Compared with women in the caesarean section group, the adjusted odds ratios for reporting symptoms of prolapse were 2.4 (95% CI 1.30–4.59) and 3.2 (95% CI 1.65–6.12) in the normal vaginal delivery/vacuum extraction group and forceps group, respectively. Conclusions: There is a clear link between vaginal delivery and symptoms and signs of pelvic organ prolapse in urogynaecological patients. Tweetable abstract: Compared with caesarean section a history of vaginal delivery more than doubles the risk for POP.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1551-1556
Number of pages6
JournalBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Volume123
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Aug 2016

Fingerprint

Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Observational Studies
Prolapse
Retrospective Studies
Obstetrical Vacuum Extraction
Cesarean Section
Signs and Symptoms
Surgical Instruments
Pelvic Floor Disorders
Urinary Tract
Obstetrics
History
Odds Ratio
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Databases
Population

Keywords

  • Caesarean section
  • delivery
  • forceps
  • pelvic organ prolapse

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Cite this

Delivery mode and pelvic organ prolapse : a retrospective observational study. / Trutnovsky, G.; Kamisan @ Atan, Ixora; Martin, A.; Dietz, H. P.

In: BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Vol. 123, No. 9, 01.08.2016, p. 1551-1556.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{62b3fa6bc86348408528c9791cc32904,
title = "Delivery mode and pelvic organ prolapse: a retrospective observational study",
abstract = "Objective: To analyse the associations between delivery mode and symptoms and signs of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in a cohort of symptomatic women. Design: Retrospective observational study. Population: A total of 1258 consecutive women attending a tertiary urogynaecological unit for the investigation of lower urinary tract or pelvic floor disorders between January 2012 and December 2014. Methods: Obstetric history and clinical examination data were obtained from the unit database. Prolapse quantification on imaging was performed using stored four-dimensional translabial ultrasound volume data sets. Women were grouped into four groups according to the most traumatic delivery reported. The presence of symptoms and signs of POP were compared between delivery groups while controlling for potential confounders. Main outcome measures: Prolapse symptoms, visual analogue score for prolapse bother, International Continence Society Prolapse Quantification System findings and ultrasound findings of anterior, central and posterior compartment descent. Results: Nulliparae showed the lowest prevalence of most measures of POP, followed by women exclusively delivered by caesarean section. Highest prevalences were consistently found in women delivered at least once by forceps, although the differences between this group and women delivered by normal vaginal delivery and/or vacuum extraction were significant in three out of eight measures only. Compared with women in the caesarean section group, the adjusted odds ratios for reporting symptoms of prolapse were 2.4 (95{\%} CI 1.30–4.59) and 3.2 (95{\%} CI 1.65–6.12) in the normal vaginal delivery/vacuum extraction group and forceps group, respectively. Conclusions: There is a clear link between vaginal delivery and symptoms and signs of pelvic organ prolapse in urogynaecological patients. Tweetable abstract: Compared with caesarean section a history of vaginal delivery more than doubles the risk for POP.",
keywords = "Caesarean section, delivery, forceps, pelvic organ prolapse",
author = "G. Trutnovsky and {Kamisan @ Atan}, Ixora and A. Martin and Dietz, {H. P.}",
year = "2016",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/1471-0528.13692",
language = "English",
volume = "123",
pages = "1551--1556",
journal = "BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology",
issn = "1470-0328",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Delivery mode and pelvic organ prolapse

T2 - a retrospective observational study

AU - Trutnovsky, G.

AU - Kamisan @ Atan, Ixora

AU - Martin, A.

AU - Dietz, H. P.

PY - 2016/8/1

Y1 - 2016/8/1

N2 - Objective: To analyse the associations between delivery mode and symptoms and signs of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in a cohort of symptomatic women. Design: Retrospective observational study. Population: A total of 1258 consecutive women attending a tertiary urogynaecological unit for the investigation of lower urinary tract or pelvic floor disorders between January 2012 and December 2014. Methods: Obstetric history and clinical examination data were obtained from the unit database. Prolapse quantification on imaging was performed using stored four-dimensional translabial ultrasound volume data sets. Women were grouped into four groups according to the most traumatic delivery reported. The presence of symptoms and signs of POP were compared between delivery groups while controlling for potential confounders. Main outcome measures: Prolapse symptoms, visual analogue score for prolapse bother, International Continence Society Prolapse Quantification System findings and ultrasound findings of anterior, central and posterior compartment descent. Results: Nulliparae showed the lowest prevalence of most measures of POP, followed by women exclusively delivered by caesarean section. Highest prevalences were consistently found in women delivered at least once by forceps, although the differences between this group and women delivered by normal vaginal delivery and/or vacuum extraction were significant in three out of eight measures only. Compared with women in the caesarean section group, the adjusted odds ratios for reporting symptoms of prolapse were 2.4 (95% CI 1.30–4.59) and 3.2 (95% CI 1.65–6.12) in the normal vaginal delivery/vacuum extraction group and forceps group, respectively. Conclusions: There is a clear link between vaginal delivery and symptoms and signs of pelvic organ prolapse in urogynaecological patients. Tweetable abstract: Compared with caesarean section a history of vaginal delivery more than doubles the risk for POP.

AB - Objective: To analyse the associations between delivery mode and symptoms and signs of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in a cohort of symptomatic women. Design: Retrospective observational study. Population: A total of 1258 consecutive women attending a tertiary urogynaecological unit for the investigation of lower urinary tract or pelvic floor disorders between January 2012 and December 2014. Methods: Obstetric history and clinical examination data were obtained from the unit database. Prolapse quantification on imaging was performed using stored four-dimensional translabial ultrasound volume data sets. Women were grouped into four groups according to the most traumatic delivery reported. The presence of symptoms and signs of POP were compared between delivery groups while controlling for potential confounders. Main outcome measures: Prolapse symptoms, visual analogue score for prolapse bother, International Continence Society Prolapse Quantification System findings and ultrasound findings of anterior, central and posterior compartment descent. Results: Nulliparae showed the lowest prevalence of most measures of POP, followed by women exclusively delivered by caesarean section. Highest prevalences were consistently found in women delivered at least once by forceps, although the differences between this group and women delivered by normal vaginal delivery and/or vacuum extraction were significant in three out of eight measures only. Compared with women in the caesarean section group, the adjusted odds ratios for reporting symptoms of prolapse were 2.4 (95% CI 1.30–4.59) and 3.2 (95% CI 1.65–6.12) in the normal vaginal delivery/vacuum extraction group and forceps group, respectively. Conclusions: There is a clear link between vaginal delivery and symptoms and signs of pelvic organ prolapse in urogynaecological patients. Tweetable abstract: Compared with caesarean section a history of vaginal delivery more than doubles the risk for POP.

KW - Caesarean section

KW - delivery

KW - forceps

KW - pelvic organ prolapse

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84979036043&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84979036043&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/1471-0528.13692

DO - 10.1111/1471-0528.13692

M3 - Article

VL - 123

SP - 1551

EP - 1556

JO - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

JF - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

SN - 1470-0328

IS - 9

ER -