Luteal phase support using micronized vaginal progesterone as pessaries or capsules in artificial cycles: is there any difference?

RESEARCH QUESTION: Is there a difference between the proportion of patients with serum progesterone <8.8 ng/ml on the day of embryo transfer when micronized vaginal progesterone (MVP) for luteal phase support (LPS) is given as pessaries versus capsules? DESIGN: This retrospective, matched-cohort, single-centre study compared pessaries (Cyclogest) versus capsules (Utrogestan, Progeffik) for LPS in hormone replacement treatment-embryo transfer (HRT-ET) cycles. Patients under 50 years old with a triple-layer endometrial thickness of ≥6.5 mm underwent transfer of one or two blastocysts. Serum progesterone concentrations were measured on the day of transfer; patients with concentrations <8.8 ng/ml received a single 'rescue' dose of additional progesterone by subcutaneous injection. RESULTS: In total 2665 HRT-ET cycles were analysed; 663 (24.9%) used pessaries for LPS and 2002 (75.1%) used capsules. Mean serum progesterone concentrations with standard deviations on the day of embryo transfer were significantly higher in the group using MVP pessaries compared with those using capsules (14.5 ± 5.1 versus 13.0 ± 4.8 ng/ml; P = 0.000). The percentage of participants with suboptimal serum progesterone concentrations on the day of embryo transfer (<8.8 ng/ml) was significantly lower in the pessary group than the capsule group (10.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.9-12.6% versus 17.9%, 95% CI 16.2-19.6%; adjusted odds ratio 0.426, 95% CI 0.290-0.625; P = 0.000). No differences in pregnancy outcome were observed between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Using MVP pessaries rather than capsules for LPS resulted in significantly fewer patients having suboptimal serum progesterone concentrations on the day of embryo transfer. Consequently, almost 50% fewer patients in the pessary group needed rescue treatment.

Management of short cervix in twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome: a role for pessary placement following fetoscopic laser surgery?

BACKGROUND: Preterm labor and delivery is a major concern for patients with twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome undergoing fetoscopic laser surgery. A preoperative short cervix is a risk factor for preterm labor. Pessary placement is a short-acting intervention that may be useful to reduce this adverse event. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the relationship between pessary placement and preterm delivery in monochorionic twin pregnancies with twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome and a short cervix before fetoscopic laser surgery. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective study in 2 centers, including all pregnancies affected by twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome that underwent fetoscopic laser surgery with the Solomon technique between 2013 and 2022 (center A) and 2014 and 2022 (center B) with a preoperative cervical length below 25 mm. This study explored the correlation between cervical length and fetoscopic laser surgery-to-delivery interval following active or expectant management and compared perinatal outcomes between patients managed expectantly and patients managed with pessary placement, using multivariate analysis to control for potential confounders. Patients with a cervical length below 5 mm were not included in the comparative analysis. RESULTS: Of 685 patients, 134 met the inclusion criteria. Moreover, 21 patients were treated with a cervical cerclage and excluded from the analysis, leaving 113 patients for the final analysis. There was a significant negative correlation between cervical length at fetoscopic laser surgery and the risk of early delivery (adjusted odds ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-0.81; P<.001). The use of a pessary correlated with fewer patients delivering before 28 weeks of gestation (adjusted odds ratio, 0.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.75), fewer double neonatal demise (adjusted odds ratio, 0.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-0.75). Posthoc subgroup analysis suggested that these improvements were essentially noticeable for cervical lengths between 5 and 18 mm, where pessary placement was associated with an increased fetoscopic laser surgery-to-delivery interval (+24 days; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-42; P=.042) and later gestational age at delivery (+3.3 weeks; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-42; P=.035). CONCLUSION: Patients with a moderately shortened cervix, between 5 and 18 mm, may benefit from pessary placement after fetoscopic surgery for twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome, resulting in a reduction of adverse neonatal outcomes, double neonatal demise, and severe preterm delivery.

Cost-Effectiveness of 2 Models of Pessary Care for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Findings From the TOPSY Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Pelvic organ prolapse is the descent of one or more reproductive organs from their normal position, causing associated negative symptoms. One conservative treatment option is pessary management. This study aimed to to investigate the cost-effectiveness of pessary self-management (SM) when compared with clinic-based care (CBC). A decision analytic model was developed to extend the economic evaluation. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial with health economic evaluation. The SM group received a 30-minute SM teaching session, information leaflet, 2-week follow-up call, and a local helpline number. The CBC group received routine outpatient pessary appointments, determined by usual practice. The primary outcome for the cost-effectiveness analysis was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), 18 months post-randomization. Uncertainty was handled using nonparametric bootstrap analysis. In addition, a simple decision analytic model was developed using the trial data to extend the analysis over a 5-year period. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the mean number of QALYs gained between SM and CBC (1.241 vs 1.221), but mean cost was lower for SM (£578 vs £728). The incremental net benefit estimated at a willingness to pay of £20 000 per QALY gained was £564, with an 80.8% probability of cost-effectiveness. The modeling results were consistent with the trial analysis: the incremental net benefit was estimated as £4221, and the probability of SM being cost-effective at 5 years was 69.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that pessary SM is likely to be cost-effective. The decision analytic model suggests that this result is likely to persist over longer durations.

Patient experience of pain during vaginal pessary removal and insertion: a service evaluation study.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Pelvic organ prolapse is a common problem affecting women, but there is currently a lack of research focusing on patient experience of pessary changes. This study was aimed at capturing the patient perspective of pessary changes and formally assessing pain during pessary removal and insertion. METHODS: A service evaluation request was granted by South Tees Hospitals NHS Trust. Patients undergoing pessary change (ring, shelf, or Gellhorn) in gynaecology outpatient clinics over a 6-month period were asked to rate their pain scores on a ten-point numerical pain-rating scale. Other associated data were collected. RESULTS: Out of 213 women, 58.2% reported that pessary removal was more painful than insertion, 30.5% reported equal pain, and 10.8% reported that insertion was more painful than removal. Pain scores were significantly higher for removal (mean 4.37, median 4, IQR 4-7) than for insertion (mean 2.66, median 2, IQR 2-4, p <0.001). Ring pessaries were significantly less painful to both remove and insert than shelf and Gellhorn pessaries. Smaller pessaries were more painful to both remove and insert. There was no significant difference in pain scores reported by those with or without diagnosed vulval conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Pessary removal causes most women moderate pain, which should be communicated to patients beforehand. Ring pessaries are significantly less painful to change than other pessary types. Clinicians should consider pain as a factor in their decision-making surrounding pessary choice and when counselling patients. Future research should focus on ways to reduce pain during pessary removal.

Adherence to support pessary in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: a retrospective study conducted among 1,371 women.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective was to investigate the adherence to pessary treatment in women with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) who were found eligible for this treatment by the urogynecologist, at the first visit at the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Odense University Hospital. METHODS: Data were extracted from the women's medical records. Frequency tabulations were performed to describe the women's reasons for pessary discontinuation by age group. Binominal logistic regression analysis was conducted to investigate how women's age, POP characteristics, urogynecological history, and their pessary experience and management were associated with continued pessary use. RESULTS: This study included 1,371 women treated with support pessary. Of these, 850 women continued pessary treatment and 521 women underwent surgical treatment. A history of hysterectomy (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.51-0.90, p = 0.008), urinary incontinence (OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.56-0.89, p = 0.003), and previous pessary use (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.56-0.99, p = 0.047) were significant factors associated with discontinuation. Further, women aged 81-99 years were significantly more likely to continue pessary treatment (OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.15-2.74, p = 0.009). "POP surgery," "prolapse stage," and "prolapse predominant compartment" were not associated with discontinuation. Approximately 38% of women aged 26-54 years discontinued owing to personal preference. CONCLUSIONS: Hysterectomy, incontinence, and previous pessary use are significant predictors of pessary discontinuation. Increasing age is significantly associated with pessary continuation.

Outcomes of pessary fitting trials for patients with stage IV pelvic organ prolapse: a prospective study.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective was to evaluate the efficacy of pessaries in the treatment of stage IV pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and identify the influencing factors. METHODS: One hundred and fifty-seven patients with stage IV symptomatic POP were admitted to the hospital for pessary fitting. A successful pessary fitting was defined as a patient fitted with a pessary at the initial fitting in whom use continued 2 weeks later. The rates of successful pessary fitting, patient satisfaction, remission of prolapse and urinary symptoms, and the occurrence of factors associated with successful pessary fitting were calculated and predictors of appropriate pessary type selection were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients with stage IV POP had a successful pessary fitting (82.8%). The satisfaction rate associated with the two types of pessaries was more than 90%. The success rate among patients undergoing a ring pessary fitting trial was 44.6%, and 84.3% of the patients were self-managed. Prolapse symptoms significantly improved in 90% of cases, and urinary symptoms improved in 58-93% of cases from baseline. The number of vaginal deliveries, history of hysterectomy and vaginal introitus/total vaginal length (TVL) ratio were independent risk factors associated with unsuccessful pessary fitting. CONCLUSION: For patients with stage IV POP, the successful fitting rate is as high as 80% or more. More vaginal deliveries, a history of hysterectomy, and a larger vaginal introitus/TVL ratio (ratio >0.6) were predictors of unsuccessful pessary fitting.

Pessaries for pelvic organ prolapse: evaluation of vaginal discharge and pain during pessary cleaning in an outpatient setting.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Pessary treatment for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is effective and safe, but long-term continuation is low. Pain and vaginal discharge may play a role. This study was aimed at evaluating vaginal discharge and pain during pessary cleaning in an outpatient setting and in continuous pessary use. METHODS: Women with POP who attended the outpatient clinic for pessary cleaning between January and October 2021 were included. Primary outcome was pain during removal and reinsertion of the pessary, measured by an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS). Secondary outcome was vaginal discharge, measured by the NRS and Patient Global Impression of Change scale (PGI-C). Multiple linear regression analysis was used to identify associated variables for pain and discharge. RESULTS: A total of 150 women were included. Mean NRS during pessary removal was 4.3 (± 2.7), with 25% of women scoring a 7 or higher. Mean NRS during reinsertion was 1.8 (± 2.0). A smaller genital hiatus and presence of vaginal atrophy or vulvar skin disease were associated with pain during pessary removal. Mean NRS for vaginal discharge was 2.5 (± 2.3). Twenty-five percent of women reported that their vaginal discharge was "(very) much worse" than before they used a pessary. Presence of vaginal erosions was associated with vaginal discharge in this study population. CONCLUSIONS: Removing a pessary in an outpatient setting is a painful procedure for many women who use a pessary continuously. Moreover, 25% of these women experience an increase in vaginal discharge while using a pessary. Future research should focus on reducing these disadvantages.

Long-Term Compliance of Self-Care Pessary in Symptomatic Pelvic Organ Prolapse.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Continuation of using a pessary for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is important for improving symptoms but the data on long-term compliance is very limited. Therefore, we conducted this study aimed at evaluating the compliance of patients in the long-term use of a pessary. METHODS: The medical records of women with symptomatic POP were retrospectively reviewed to recruit cases opting for pessary use. The inclusion criteria were women who had a successful pessary fitting and completed at least 5 years of follow-up. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, death during the follow-up period, and loss to follow-up. Demographic data, pelvic organ prolapse stage, associated symptoms, type and size of pessary, and reason for discontinuation were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 261 patients opted for pessary use. Of them, 88.9% (231 out of 261) were successful in initial pessary fitting and 54 were excluded for various reasons. The remaining 178 patients were available for analysis. The continuation rate of self-care pessary at the 5-year follow-up was 53.93% (96). The discontinuation rate was 46.07% (82). The main reasons for discontinuation were desire for surgery (39.1%) and discomfort (31.7%). The highest rate of discontinuation (46.63%) was found in the 1st year of follow-up. The significant risk factors of discontinuation included digitation symptoms on univariate analysis and prior hysterectomy on multivariate analysis, with an odds ratio (95% CI) of 5.98 (1.56-22.88). CONCLUSIONS: Among Thai women, the adherence to self-care pessary in symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse at the 5-year follow-up was 53.93%. The main reason for discontinuation was a prior hysterectomy.

Vaginal microflora following the use of a disposable home-use vaginal device and a commercially available ring pessary for pelvic organ prolapse management: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether ProVate, a novel, disposable, self-inserted vaginal device for pelvic organ prolapse management, clinically affects the vaginal microflora, as compared with a commercially available ring pessary, to assess its microbiological safety. METHODS: This interventional, prospective, multi-center, open-label, randomized, controlled, statistically powered (noninferiority), home-use, crossover study was conducted at seven sites. Participants were randomized into either group A (using ProVate and then a new reusable commercially available ring pessary [control]) or B (using control device and then ProVate) with a 1:1 ratio. Noninferiority of ProVate over the control was evaluated for the primary endpoint, which was based on meeting one of the failure criteria: significant change in Lactobacillus spp., Gardnerella vaginalis, Candida morphotypes, or Staphylococcus aureus levels compared to the baseline (significant change: Nugent score ≥ 7 or > 1 scale unit increase in S. aureus or Candida morphotype), bothersome vaginal infection symptoms, or symptoms requiring treatment for infection. RESULTS: The study included 58 participants (mean age: 64.5 years, 91.4% postmenopausal). There were no significant microfloral changes in terms of the four microorganisms mentioned above, the rate of Nugent score ≥ 7 after use was low and comparable between the two devices, and the rate of patients with a > 1 unit-scale change (increase or decrease) from the baseline to the end-of-use phase in any studied microorganism was comparable between the devices. The failure rate was 15.5% for ProVate and 15.5% for control while using 383 ProVate devices over 1647 days or one control device throughout the study. Two patients had bothersome vaginal complaints and one had overt vaginal infection in the control group, but no such cases were observed in the ProVate group. CONCLUSION: The primary endpoint of possible vaginal microbial changes, bothersome vaginal symptoms, or treatment-requiring vaginal complaints while using ProVate was successfully met. Our findings show that the vaginal microflora is comparable when using either ProVate or commercially available ring pessary (control) with a relatively low rate of vaginal infections. Trial registration details: ClinicalTrials.gov; URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT03345121?term=NCT03345121&draw=2&rank=1 ; No. NCT03345121; Registration date, November 17, 2017; initial enrollment started on August 20, 2017.

Analysis of questions by patients with pelvic organ prolapse about vaginal pessaries resulting in a checklist for their physicians.

OBJECTIVE: International guidelines recommend vaginal pessaries as a first-choice treatment of symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Gynecologists rarely receive systematic training or just do not take the time to communicate with their patients. We hypothesized that we could identify key deficits and limitations of counseling before or during pessary therapy from questions directed to manufacturers with the aim to improve and promote health literacy of women with POP. METHODS: We approached five manufacturers to provide anonymized inquiries related to pessary use. After exclusion of duplicates and questions about obstetric pessaries, 174 data sets from 145 patients remained. RESULTS: In 19/145 patients (13.1%), a 2nd degree, and in 94/145 (64.8%), a 3rd-4th degree of POP was identified. Four patients had additional urinary incontinence. In 32/145 (22.1%), the severity of POP could not be identified. The age of patients ranged from 27 to 98 (mean = 63.7) years. Most inquiries were related to the selected pessary models or sizes (40/174; 22.9%), self-management (20/174; 11.5%), and technical aspects such as shelf life or appropriate cleaning (26/174; 14.9%). Pain or voiding dysfunction was present in 17/174 remarks (9.7%). Lifestyle questions related to the use of pessaries during sport, menstruation, or mechanical anticonception. The cube pessary was in the focus of interest followed by the sieve bowl, urethra, ring, and Gellhorn device. The list of questions was summarized as a checklist stratified according to priorities. CONCLUSION: The checklist should help improve counseling and self-management of patients to optimize the benefit/risk ratio of conservative treatment of pelvic floor diseases.

Self-care of vaginal pessary for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: There is no evidence about the efficacy of self-care of vaginal pessary in women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the adherence to pessary treatment among women who engage in self-management of their pessary. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis, according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines, and selected seven publications for inclusion in the analysis. RESULTS: Pooled continuation rate of self-cared vaginal pessary was the 76% (95%CI: 66-85%) with a I2-test of 93.3% (p < 0.001). Pooled conversion to POP surgery was the 12% (95%CI: 1-23%) with a I2-test of 96% (p < 0.001). Continuation rate was not statistically different between women who were treated by self-care and non-self-care management of vaginal pessary (RR 1.11, 95%CI 0.96-1.27; p = 0.15), with a related I2-test of 37% (p = 0.21). CONCLUSION: Self-care vaginal pessary management presented a high continuation rate in women affected by pelvic organ prolapse at a long follow-up. The rate of conversion to surgical management of POP was low. No significant difference in continuation rate were highlighted between women who adopted the self-care or the clinical-based management of pessary.

Long-term continuations rate of ring pessary use for symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse.

PURPOSE: To evaluate long-term continuation rates, adverse events of ring pessary use at a minimum of 5 years follow-up, and factors associated with discontinuation in symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP). METHODS: Women with symptomatic POP who were treated with vaginal ring pessary and had successful fittings were included. Adverse events and reasons for discontinuation of pessary use were recorded. Patients who were lost to follow-up were defined as discontinuation. RESULTS: During 12 year-period, 239 of 329 POP patients (72.6%) had successful fittings with ring pessary. The mean age was 67.8 ± 8.9 years (range 27-86) and 70% of patients had advanced stage. The cumulative probability of continued ring pessary use was 84.1%, 64.4%, 49.3%, and 33.5%, at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years, respectively. Most common reason for discontinuation was frequent expulsion (21.6%), followed by vaginal erosion (16.5%), no prolapse improvement (12.4%), and inability or inconvenience to do self-care (9.3%). However, 9 patients (9.3%) had improvement of prolapse and were able to discontinue pessary insertion. Age above 70 years, wide introitus, and incapability of self-care are independent factors associated with long-term discontinuation. Adverse events occurred in 23.4% of patients, 18.8% of them had vaginal erosion, 11.7% vaginal discharge/infection, and 18.4% de novo SUI. However, no statistical significance existed between those who continued and discontinued pessary use due to these adverse events. CONCLUSION: Ring pessary is an effective treatment in symptomatic POP, with acceptable long-term continuation rates and minor adverse events. Self-care of pessary is very important aiming to minimize adverse events. Advanced age, wide introitus and incapability of self-care were associated factors for long-term discontinuation.

Prediction of Preterm Birth with the Uterocervical Angle in Singleton Pregnancies Treated with a Cervical Pessary.

BACKGROUND: Cervical pessaries are an established therapy option for patients at risk for spontaneous preterm birth (sPTB). The uterocervical angle (UCA) remains a promising sPTB predictor. However, its clinical significance has yet to be described in patients treated with a pessary. METHODS: This study analyzed data of patients treated with a pessary because of cervical shortening in singleton pregnancies. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to transvaginal ultrasound findings: the funneling group (n = 68) and the no-funneling group (n = 42). Moreover, we analyzed patients within these prespecified groups according to the UCA < 95° and ≥ 95°. RESULTS: Delivery occurred significantly earlier in patients treated with a pessary and with a high UCA ≥ 95°(p = 0.006). The median gestational age at delivery in patients treated with a pessary and with no funneling and a UCA < 95° vs. ≥ 95° were 39.00 and 36.14 weeks, respectively (p = 0.005). In cases with funneling and a UCA < 95° vs. ≥ 95° the mean gestational age at delivery was 38.14 and 38.07 weeks respectively (p=1,00). There was a significant negative linear correlation between UCA and the gestational age at delivery in all patients (p = 0.04), which was even profound in the group without funneling (p = 0.0002). However, we found no significant correlation between cervical length and gestational age at delivery in all patients (p = 0.42) as well as in the group without funneling (p = 0.28). CONCLUSION: In spite of pessary treatment, patients with UCA ≥ 95° presented with a higher risk of sPTB compared to patients with UCA < 95°. This suggests that the UCA seems to be a better predictor of sPTB than the cervical length in patients receiving pessary treatment.

Use and Impact of Pessary, Cerclage, and Progesterone for the Secondary Prevention of Preterm Birth: Data from the German Neonatal Network.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the use and effect of cervical stitch cerclage, pessary, and progesterone on pregnancy outcome in mothers of very low birth weight infants (VLBWI) born<32 weeks of gestation in the German Neonatal Network (GNN). METHODS: The GNN is a population-based cohort study enrolling VLBWI since 2009. We included 575 neonates from 424 mothers into our analysis, who were born between 2015 and 2019, after prenatal intervention with cerclage, pessary, progesterone or a combination between 20/0 to 25/0 weeks of gestation to prevent preterm birth. Median intervention-to-birth interval was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: 231 of 424 pregnant women had a cerclage only (54.5%), 76 women a pessary only (17.9%), and 27 were prescribed progesterone only (15.3%). The most common combination treatment (>1 intervention group) was cerclage plus progesterone (n=27), followed by cerclage plus pessary (n=13). The median intervention-to-birth interval for the whole cohort was 24 days (IQR 19.0 days). The earlier the intervention was started, the longer the intervention-to-birth interval lasted: When started at 20 weeks, the interval was 34 days in contrast to 11.5 days, when started at 25 weeks. The >1 group was born at a significantly higher median GA with 27.0 weeks (IQR 2.9 weeks) and a higher median birth weight of 980 g (IQR 394 g) accordingly. CONCLUSION: We propose that the earliest possible start of intervention leads to the most efficient pregnancy prolongation.

Quality of Life after Treatment for Pelvic Organ Prolapse in Real-World Study: Recommendations, Vaginal Pessary, and Surgery.

Background and Objectives: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common condition in women, with its prevalence increasing with age, and can significantly impact the quality of life (QOL) of many individuals. The objective of this study was to assess the overall improvement, quality of life, and continuation of primary treatment for POP over a 24-month period in a real-world setting. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective, observational, follow-up study of women with symptomatic POP who, as a primary treatment, opted for recommendations (lifestyle changes and pelvic floor muscle training), pessary therapy, or surgery. The primary outcome measure was a subjective improvement at the 24-month follow-up, measured with the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scale. Secondary outcome measures were the continuation rate of the primary treatment method, reason for discontinuation, and the quality of life evaluated with the P-QoL questionnaire. Results: We included 137 women, with 45 women (32.8%) in the recommendations group, 39 (28.5%) in the pessary group, and 53 women (38.7%) in the surgery group. After 24 months, surgery, in comparison with pessary treatment and recommendations, resulted in significantly more women reporting a subjective improvement: 89.6%, 66.7%, and 22.9% (p < 0.001), respectively. Overall, 52% of women from the recommendations group and 36.4% from the pessary group switched to another treatment or discontinued the primary treatment within 24 months. However, women who continued the primary treatment, pessary use, and surgery showed similar subjective improvements (90.5% and 89.6%, respectively) and quality-of-life improvement. Conclusions: The chance of significant improvement was higher following surgery. However, after 24 months, both vaginal pessaries and surgery showed an important quality-of life improvement and can be proposed as primary treatment methods for pelvic organ prolapse.

Research progress in female pelvic floor rehabilitation aids. / å¥³æ€§ç›†åº•åº·å¤è¾ åŠ©å™¨å ·çš„ç ”ç©¶è¿›å±•.

Pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD) is a common clinical problem that can lead to bladder and bowel dysfunction such as urinary incontinence, urinary retention, fecal incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, and sexual dysfunction. Pelvic floor rehabilitation aids are essential tools in the treatment of PFD. However, there is limited understanding of the efficacy and mechanisms of these aids, and there is a lack of standardized guidelines for selecting appropriate aids for different types of PFD. To assist patients in choosing suitable pelvic floor rehabilitation aids to their needs, it is necessary to summarize the existing types, mechanisms, and applications of these aids. Based on their mechanisms and target functions, pelvic floor rehabilitation aids can be mainly categorized into 3 main types. The first type includes aids that improve pelvic floor function, such as vaginal dumbbells, vaginal tampons, and vaginal dilators, which aim to strengthen pelvic floor muscles and enhance the contractility of the urethral, vaginal, and anal sphincters, thereby improving incontinence symptoms. The second type consists of aids that mechanically block the outlet, such as pessaries, urethral plugs, incontinence pads, incontinence pants, anal plugs, and vaginal bowel control systems, which directly or indirectly prevent incontinence leakage. The third type includes aids that assist in outlet drainage, such as catheters and anal excreta collection devices, which help patients effectively expel urine, feces, and other waste materials, preventing incontinence leakage. By summarizing the existing pelvic floor rehabilitation aids, personalized guidance can be provided to patients with PFD, helping them select the appropriate aids for their rehabilitation needs.

Transition to surgery after pessary among female Medicare beneficiaries with pelvic organ prolapse.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends offering a vaginal pessary to women seeking treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. However, single-institution series have suggested that a sizable proportion of women fitted with a pessary will transition to surgery within the first year. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to estimate the proportion of female US Medicare beneficiaries with pelvic organ prolapse who undergo surgery after pessary fitting, to describe the median time to surgery from pessary fitting, and to identify factors associated with the transition from pessary to surgery. STUDY DESIGN: The Medicare 5% Limited Data Set was queried from 2011 to 2016 for women aged ≥65 years with a diagnosis of prolapse who underwent pessary fitting. Cases with at least 3 years of follow-up in the Medicare Data Set were followed longitudinally for the primary outcome of surgery for prolapse. The cumulative incidence of prolapse surgery following index pessary fitting was calculated. Characteristics of women who underwent surgery and those who did not were compared using time-varying Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Among 2032 women fitted with a pessary, 608 underwent surgery within 7 years. The median time to surgery was 496 days (interquartile range, 187-1089 days). The cumulative incidence of prolapse surgery was 12.2% at 1 year and 30.9% at 7 years. After adjusting for covariates, factors significantly associated with the transition to surgery included previous prolapse surgery (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.50; 1.09-2.07) and a diagnosis of urinary incontinence at the time of pessary fitting (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.20; 0.62-0.99). Factors associated with a lower hazard of surgery included age (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.96 per year; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-0.97), dual Medicare/Medicaid eligibility (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-1.00), and pessary fitting by a nongynecologist (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.99). CONCLUSION: In this population of Medicare beneficiaries, within 7 years of pessary fitting, almost one-third of women aged >65 years underwent surgery for prolapse. These results add to our current understanding of the demographics of pessary use in an older population and may aid in counseling older patients presenting for treatment of symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse.

Oestrogen therapy for treating pelvic organ prolapse in postmenopausal women.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is the descent of a woman's uterus, bladder, or rectum into the vagina. It affects 50% of women over 50 years old who have given birth to at least one child, and recognised risk factors are older age, higher number of births, and higher body mass index. This review assesses the effects of oestrogen therapy, alone or in combination with other treatments, on POP in postmenopausal women. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of local and systemic oestrogen therapy in the management of pelvic organ prolapse symptoms in postmenopausal women, and to summarise the principal findings of relevant economic evaluations. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register (up to 20 June 2022), which includes CENTRAL, MEDLINE, two trials registers, and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings. We also checked the reference lists of relevant articles for additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, multi-arm RCTs, and cross-over RCTs that evaluated the effects of oestrogen therapy (alone or in combination with other treatments) versus placebo, no treatment, or other interventions in postmenopausal women with any grade of POP. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data from the included trials using prespecified outcome measures and a piloted extraction form. The same review authors independently assessed the risk of bias of eligible trials using Cochrane's risk of bias tool. Had data allowed, we would have created summary of findings tables for our main outcome measures and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 14 studies including a total of 1002 women. In general, studies were at high risk of bias in terms of blinding of participants and personnel, and there were also some concerns about selective reporting. Owing to insufficient data for the outcomes of interest, we were unable to perform our planned subgroup analyses (systemic versus topical oestrogen, parous versus nulliparous women, women with versus without a uterus). No studies assessed the effects of oestrogen therapy alone versus no treatment, placebo, pelvic floor muscle training, devices such as vaginal pessaries, or surgery. However, we did identify three studies that assessed oestrogen therapy in conjunction with vaginal pessaries versus vaginal pessaries alone and 11 studies that assessed oestrogen therapy in conjunction with surgery versus surgery alone. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was insufficient evidence from RCTs to draw any solid conclusions on the benefits or harms of oestrogen therapy for managing POP symptoms in postmenopausal women. Topical oestrogen in conjunction with pessaries was associated with fewer adverse vaginal events compared with pessaries alone, and topical oestrogen in conjunction with surgery was associated with reduced postoperative urinary tract infections compared with surgery alone; however, these findings should be interpreted with caution, as the studies that contributed data varied substantially in their design. There is a need for larger studies on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of oestrogen therapy, used alone or in conjunction with pelvic floor muscle training, vaginal pessaries, or surgery, for the management of POP. These studies should measure outcomes in the medium and long term.

Posterior compartment prolapse and perineal descent: systematic review of available support devices.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study is to systematically review the literature about available devices facilitating perineal support during defecation in patients with obstructive defecation syndrome (ODS) and posterior pelvic organ prolapse (POP). METHODS: We searched for the terms "defecat/ion or ODS" and" pessar/ies or device/aid/tool/perineal/perianal/prolapse and support" in MEDLINE, PubMed and Web of Science. Data abstraction was performed according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis) guidelines. A two-stage inclusion was performed, selecting first on title and abstract and secondly the full text. For variables with sufficient data, a meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Other variables were descriptively reported. RESULTS: Ten studies out of 1332 were included for systematic review. The devices could be categorized into three groups: pessaries (n = 8), vaginal stent (n = 1) and external support device (n = 1). Methodology and data reporting is heterogeneous. Meta-analysis could be performed for the Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory (CRADI-8) and Impact Questionnaire (CRAI-Q-7) in three pessary studies which showed a significant mean change. Significant improvement of stool evacuation was seen in two other pessary studies. The vaginal stent significantly decreases ODS. Subjective perception of constipation improved significantly using the posterior perineal support device. CONCLUSION: All reviewed devices seem to improve ODS in patients with POP. There are no data on their efficacy with regard to perineal descent-associated ODS. There is a lack of comparative studies between devices. Studies are difficult to compare due to different inclusion criteria and evaluation tools.

Self-management of vaginal cube pessaries may be a game changer for pelvic organ prolapse treatment: a long-term follow-up study.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Loss of anatomical support for the pelvic organs results in pelvic organ prolapse (POP). We hypothesized that daily self-management of a cube pessary might be a safe, feasible long-term treatment in women with symptomatic POP. METHODS: A cohort of 214 symptomatic POP patients (stage 2+) were enrolled prospectively (January to December 2015). Each patient was size-fitted with a space-filling cube pessary and completed a questionnaire online or by phone ≥5 years after her initial fitting. Change in quality of life (QoL) was measured with the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I). RESULTS: Of 185 women included in our analyses, 174 (94%) were continuing to use their pessary 4 weeks post-insertion. Among those, 143 (82.2%) used the pessary successfully for ≥5 years. A large majority of these patients (88.8% [127 out of 143]) described their condition as much or very much improved compared with their pretreatment status (PGI-I). Adverse secondary effects (ASEs) were infrequent [15.4% (22 out of 143)]; when they did occur, they were mild, including smelly vaginal discharge (15 out of 22) and slight vaginal bleeding caused by the fitting procedure (6 out of 22). CONCLUSIONS: Daily self-management of cube pessaries was found to be a safe and effective treatment for improving POP-related symptoms and QoL in the long term.