Hysterectomy on benign indication and risk of pelvic organ prolapse surgery: A national matched cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Hysterectomy is a frequently performed gynecological procedure but long-term effects remain understudied. Pelvic organ prolapse reduces life quality significantly. The lifetime risk of undergoing pelvic organ prolapse surgery is 20% and parity is known to be the largest risk factor. Studies have shown an increased risk of pelvic organ prolapse surgery after hysterectomy; however, few have studied the compartments which are affected and how this association is affected by surgical route and parity. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this Danish nationwide cohort study, we identified women born in 1947-2000 who underwent hysterectomy during 1977-2018 who were indexed on the day of hysterectomy. We excluded women who immigrated when older than 15 years, who underwent pelvic organ prolapse surgery prior to index, and who were diagnosed with a gynecological cancer prior to or within 30 days of index. Women who underwent hysterectomy were matched 1:5 to references on age and year of hysterectomy. Women were censored at the time of death, emigration, a gynecological cancer diagnosis, radical or unspecified hysterectomy or December 31, 2018, whichever came first. The risk of pelvic organ prolapse surgery after hysterectomy was computed using Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusted for age, calendar year, parity, income and educational level. RESULTS: We included 80 444 women who underwent hysterectomy and 396 303 reference women. Women who underwent hysterectomy had a significantly higher risk of undergoing pelvic organ prolapse surgery: HRadjusted  1.4 (95% CI 1.3-1.5). In particular, the risk of a posterior compartment prolapse operation was increased: HRadjusted 2.2 (95% CI 2.0-2.3). The risk of prolapse surgery increased with increased parity and by an additional 40% after hysterectomy. Cesarean sections did not seem to increase the risk of prolapse surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that hysterectomy, regardless of surgical route, leads to an increased risk of pelvic organ prolapse surgery, especially in the posterior compartment. The risk of prolapse surgery increased with the number of vaginal births, and not cesarean sections. Women should be thoroughly informed about the risk of pelvic organ prolapse and other treatment options should be considered before choosing hysterectomy to treat benign gynecological diseases -particularly women who have had numerous vaginal births.

Surgical repair of vaginal vault prolapse; a comparison between ipsilateral uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrospinous ligament fixation-a nationwide cohort study.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Hysterectomy is frequently performed and associated with increased risk of subsequent genital prolapse including vaginal vault prolapse. Ipsilateral uterosacral ligament suspension (IUSLS) and sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) are two commonly performed surgical techniques to treat vaginal vault prolapse. There is no consensus on the ideal operation technique. The aim of this study was to compare IUSLS and SSLF to treat vaginal vault prolapse based on the number of repeat surgeries. METHODS: Previously hysterectomized patients operated on with IUSLS or SSLF in Denmark in 2010-2016 were included in this nationwide register-based cohort study and followed until June 2017. Data were obtained from Danish National Databases, to which reporting is mandatory by law, entailing high validity and completeness of data. Data were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard regression analysis adjusted for age, preoperative prolapse stage, smoking, BMI, and previous prolapse surgery. RESULTS: In total, 744 patients were included; 384 underwent IUSLS while 360 underwent SSLF. After 5 years, 6.5% of patients operated on with IUSLS and 21.8% operated on with SSLF had a repeat surgery in the apical compartment and 12.4% and 30.6% in any compartment, respectively. The risk of repeat surgery was 4.8 times higher after SSLF compared to IUSLS [confidence interval (CI): 2.7-8.4] in the apical compartment and 2.4 times higher (CI: 1.2-5.1) in the anterior compartment. No difference was seen in the posterior compartment. CONCLUSIONS: This study finds significantly higher numbers of repeat surgeries after SSLF compared to after IUSLS in a Danish nationwide cohort.

Trends in apical prolapse surgery between 2010 and 2016 in Denmark.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Pelvic organ prolapse is a common diagnosis. Today there is no consensus on the ideal operation technique for apical prolapse. Vaginal hysterectomy with suspension of the vaginal cuff is the most frequently used, but the popularity of uterus-preserving techniques is increasing. The aim of this study was to describe trends in surgical techniques used to treat primary apical prolapse in Danish hospitals. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Danish Urogynecological Database and included women with primary prolapse surgery in the apical compartment operated in Denmark 2010-2016. Public hospital departments were divided into three categories according to degree of urogynecological specialization: high level, moderate level, and no specialization. RESULTS: The number of vaginal hysterectomies decreased and the number of uterus-preserving operations increased from 2010 to 2016. The proportion of uterus-preserving techniques versus vaginal hysterectomy differed substantially between different hospital types. At departments with high and moderate levels of specialization, uterus-preserving techniques increased during the period, accounting for nearly 90% and 40%, respectively, in 2016, while decreasing to < 35% for departments with no specialization. Three of the four departments with high-level specialization preferred the Manchester-Fothergill procedure, while one preferred sacrospinous hysteropexy. Only 2.3% of all procedures were performed at private hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of uterus-preserving techniques to treat apical prolapse increased from 2010 to 2016. However, there is a wide variation in practice at the different hospitals. An agreement on uterus-preserving techniques has not been reached.

Evaluation of suture material used in anterior colporrhaphy and the risk of recurrence.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The wide variety of suture material used in colporrhaphy shows a lack of consensus on the optimal choice. The evidence guiding the choice of suture material is scant. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of rapid versus slowly absorbable suture on risk of recurrence after native tissue anterior colporrhaphy. METHODS: This longitudinal cohort study was performed secondary to a previously published study on pelvic organ prolapse recurrence after the Manchester-Fothergill procedure versus vaginal hysterectomy. Data were collected from four Danish databases and corresponding electronic medical records. In this study, women having had anterior colporrhaphy performed were included. Suture materials were divided in three groups: rapid absorbable multifilament suture (RAMuS), rapid absorbable monofilament suture (RAMoS) and slowly absorbable monofilament suture (SAMoS). The main outcome was recurrence of prolapse in the anterior compartment. RESULTS: A total of 462 women were included in this study. No significant difference in recurrence was found among the three suture groups. However, a non-significant tendency towards a higher risk of recurrence in the RAMoS group [HR 2.14 (0.75-6.10) p = 0.16] compared to the RAMuS group was observed. CONCLUSION: In this study, the use of rapid absorbable multifilament suture compared to slowly absorbable monofilament suture does not seem to lead to a higher risk of recurrence after anterior colporrhaphy.

Surgical treatment of primary uterine prolapse: a comparison of vaginal native tissue surgical techniques.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Uterine prolapse is a common diagnosis. Today no consensus exists on which operation technique is ideal to treat apical prolapse. Vaginal hysterectomy (VH) with suspension of the vaginal cuff is the most frequently used. The popularity of uterus-preserving techniques is increasing. The aim of this study was to compare the efficiency of vaginal native tissue operations to treat primary apical prolapse, evaluated on risk of relapse surgery. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Danish National Patient Registry (NPR), which contains all operations performed in Denmark. Patients operated on for primary apical prolapse in Denmark 2010-2016 were included and followed until 2017. Clinical data were obtained from the Danish Urogynecological Database. Patients who were previously hysterectomized or operated on for prolapse in the apical compartment were excluded. Data were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard regression analysis and adjusted for age, BMI, smoking, preoperative prolapse stage and previous POP operations. RESULTS: In total, 7247 operations were included. The hazard ratio (HR) for relapse operation in the apical compartment was significantly higher after sacrospinous hysteropexy (SH) compared with the Manchester-Fothergill procedure (MP) [40.2 confidence interval (CI) 21.6-74.7] and VH (8.5 CI: 6.0-12.1). Likewise, the HR was higher in the anterior compartment after SH compared with MP (4.3 CI: 2.9-6.4) and VH (2.8 CI: 2.0-4.0). No convincing difference was found in the posterior compartment. The 5-year reoperation rates were 30%, 7% and 11% after SH, MP, and VH, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Sacrospinous hysteropexy has exceedingly high numbers of reoperations due to prolapse recurrence.

Manchester-Fothergill procedure versus vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension: an activity-based costing analysis.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common diagnosis that imposes high and ever-growing costs to the healthcare economy. Numerous surgical techniques for the treatment of POP exist, but there is no consensus about which is the ideal technique for treating apical prolapse. The aim of this study was to estimate hospital costs for the most frequently performed operation, vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension (VH) and the uterus-preserving Manchester-Fothergill procedure (MP), when including costs of postoperative activities. METHODS: The study was based on a historical matched cohort including 590 patients (295 pairs) who underwent VH or MP during 2010-2014 owing to apical prolapse. The patients were matched according to age and preoperative prolapse stage and followed for a minimum of 20 months. Data were collected from four national registries and electronic medical records. Unit costs were obtained from relevant departments, hospital administration, calculated, or estimated by experts. The hospital perspective was applied for costing the resource use. RESULTS: Total costs for the first 20 months after operation were 3,514 € per VH patient versus 2,318 € per MP patient. The cost difference between the techniques was 898 € (95% confidence interval [CI]: 818-982) per patient when analyzing the primary operation only and 1,196 € (CI: 927-1,465) when including subsequent activities within 20 months (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The MP is substantially less expensive than the commonly used VH from a 20-month time perspective. Healthcare costs can be reduced by one third if MP is preferred over VH in the treatment of apical prolapse.

The Manchester-Fothergill procedure versus vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension: a matched historical cohort study.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: This study compares vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension (VH) with the Manchester-Fothergill procedure (MP) for treating pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in the apical compartment. METHODS: Our matched historical cohort study is based on data from four Danish databases and the corresponding electronic medical records. Patients with POP surgically treated with VH (n = 295) or the MP (n = 295) in between 2010 and 2014 were matched for age and preoperative POP stage in the apical compartment. The main outcome was recurrent or de novo POP in any compartment. Secondary outcomes were recurrent or de novo POP in each compartment and complications. RESULTS: The risk of recurrent or de novo POP in any compartment was higher after VH (18.3%) compared with the MP (7.8%) (Hazard ratio, HR = 2.5, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.3-4.8). Recurrence in the apical compartment occurred in 5.1% after VH vs. 0.3% after the MP (hazard ratio (HR) = 10.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-78.1). In the anterior compartment, rates of recurrent or de novo POP were 11.2% after VH vs. 4.1% after the MP (HR = 3.5, 95% CI 1.4-8.7) and in the posterior compartment 12.9% vs. 4.7% (HR = 2.6, 95% CI 1.3-5.4), respectively. There were more perioperative complications (2.7 vs. 0%, p = 0.007) and postoperative intra-abdominal bleeding (2 vs. 0%, p = 0.03) after VH. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that the MP is superior to VH; if there is no other indication for hysterectomy, the MP should be preferred to VH for surgical treatment of POP in the apical compartment.