Cargando…
A pilot study to evaluate changes in pelvic floor muscle tone following pelvic organ prolapse surgery using a novel intra-vaginal pressure sensor device
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Pelvic floor muscle weakness is a common cause of pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Surgical repair of prolapse is commonly undertaken; however, the impact on pelvic floor muscle tone is unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of anterior a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10167131/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35939097 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00192-022-05312-4 |
_version_ | 1785038594875850752 |
---|---|
author | McConnell, James Murtagh, Lynsey Lim, Molly Pedofsky, Laura Kruger, Jennifer Budgett, David Jha, Swati |
author_facet | McConnell, James Murtagh, Lynsey Lim, Molly Pedofsky, Laura Kruger, Jennifer Budgett, David Jha, Swati |
author_sort | McConnell, James |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Pelvic floor muscle weakness is a common cause of pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Surgical repair of prolapse is commonly undertaken; however, the impact on pelvic floor muscle tone is unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of anterior and posterior colporrhaphy on pelvic floor activation. METHODS: Patients aged under 70 undergoing primary anterior or posterior colporrhaphy were recruited. Intra-vaginal pressure was measured at rest and during pelvic floor contraction using the Femfit® device (an intra-vaginal pressure sensor device [IVPSD]). Peak pressure and mean pressure over 3 s were measured in millimetres of mercury. The pre- and post-operative measurements were compared. The difference between the means was assessed using Cohen’s D test, with significance set at p<0.05 RESULTS: A total of 37 patients completed pre- and post-operative analysis, 25 in the anterior colporrhaphy group and 12 in the posterior colporrhaphy group. Anterior colporrhaphy showed no significant change in pelvic floor tone. Change in peak pressure was −1.71mmHg (−5.75 to 2.33; p=0.16) and change in mean pressure was −0.86 mmHg (−4.38 to 2.66; p=0.31). Posterior colporrhaphy showed a significant increase in peak pelvic floor muscle tone of 7.2 mmHg (0.82 to 13.58; p=0.005) and mean pressure of 4.19 mmHg (−0.09 to 8.47; p=0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Posterior colporrhaphy significantly improves pelvic floor muscle tone, whereas anterior colporrhaphy does not. Improved understanding of the impact of pelvic floor surgery may guide future management options for other pelvic floor disorders. Further work is needed to confirm the association of this improvement in pelvic floor disorders. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10167131 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101671312023-05-10 A pilot study to evaluate changes in pelvic floor muscle tone following pelvic organ prolapse surgery using a novel intra-vaginal pressure sensor device McConnell, James Murtagh, Lynsey Lim, Molly Pedofsky, Laura Kruger, Jennifer Budgett, David Jha, Swati Int Urogynecol J Original Article INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Pelvic floor muscle weakness is a common cause of pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Surgical repair of prolapse is commonly undertaken; however, the impact on pelvic floor muscle tone is unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of anterior and posterior colporrhaphy on pelvic floor activation. METHODS: Patients aged under 70 undergoing primary anterior or posterior colporrhaphy were recruited. Intra-vaginal pressure was measured at rest and during pelvic floor contraction using the Femfit® device (an intra-vaginal pressure sensor device [IVPSD]). Peak pressure and mean pressure over 3 s were measured in millimetres of mercury. The pre- and post-operative measurements were compared. The difference between the means was assessed using Cohen’s D test, with significance set at p<0.05 RESULTS: A total of 37 patients completed pre- and post-operative analysis, 25 in the anterior colporrhaphy group and 12 in the posterior colporrhaphy group. Anterior colporrhaphy showed no significant change in pelvic floor tone. Change in peak pressure was −1.71mmHg (−5.75 to 2.33; p=0.16) and change in mean pressure was −0.86 mmHg (−4.38 to 2.66; p=0.31). Posterior colporrhaphy showed a significant increase in peak pelvic floor muscle tone of 7.2 mmHg (0.82 to 13.58; p=0.005) and mean pressure of 4.19 mmHg (−0.09 to 8.47; p=0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Posterior colporrhaphy significantly improves pelvic floor muscle tone, whereas anterior colporrhaphy does not. Improved understanding of the impact of pelvic floor surgery may guide future management options for other pelvic floor disorders. Further work is needed to confirm the association of this improvement in pelvic floor disorders. Springer International Publishing 2022-08-08 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10167131/ /pubmed/35939097 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00192-022-05312-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article McConnell, James Murtagh, Lynsey Lim, Molly Pedofsky, Laura Kruger, Jennifer Budgett, David Jha, Swati A pilot study to evaluate changes in pelvic floor muscle tone following pelvic organ prolapse surgery using a novel intra-vaginal pressure sensor device |
title | A pilot study to evaluate changes in pelvic floor muscle tone following pelvic organ prolapse surgery using a novel intra-vaginal pressure sensor device |
title_full | A pilot study to evaluate changes in pelvic floor muscle tone following pelvic organ prolapse surgery using a novel intra-vaginal pressure sensor device |
title_fullStr | A pilot study to evaluate changes in pelvic floor muscle tone following pelvic organ prolapse surgery using a novel intra-vaginal pressure sensor device |
title_full_unstemmed | A pilot study to evaluate changes in pelvic floor muscle tone following pelvic organ prolapse surgery using a novel intra-vaginal pressure sensor device |
title_short | A pilot study to evaluate changes in pelvic floor muscle tone following pelvic organ prolapse surgery using a novel intra-vaginal pressure sensor device |
title_sort | pilot study to evaluate changes in pelvic floor muscle tone following pelvic organ prolapse surgery using a novel intra-vaginal pressure sensor device |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10167131/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35939097 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00192-022-05312-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mcconnelljames apilotstudytoevaluatechangesinpelvicfloormuscletonefollowingpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryusinganovelintravaginalpressuresensordevice AT murtaghlynsey apilotstudytoevaluatechangesinpelvicfloormuscletonefollowingpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryusinganovelintravaginalpressuresensordevice AT limmolly apilotstudytoevaluatechangesinpelvicfloormuscletonefollowingpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryusinganovelintravaginalpressuresensordevice AT pedofskylaura apilotstudytoevaluatechangesinpelvicfloormuscletonefollowingpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryusinganovelintravaginalpressuresensordevice AT krugerjennifer apilotstudytoevaluatechangesinpelvicfloormuscletonefollowingpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryusinganovelintravaginalpressuresensordevice AT budgettdavid apilotstudytoevaluatechangesinpelvicfloormuscletonefollowingpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryusinganovelintravaginalpressuresensordevice AT jhaswati apilotstudytoevaluatechangesinpelvicfloormuscletonefollowingpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryusinganovelintravaginalpressuresensordevice AT mcconnelljames pilotstudytoevaluatechangesinpelvicfloormuscletonefollowingpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryusinganovelintravaginalpressuresensordevice AT murtaghlynsey pilotstudytoevaluatechangesinpelvicfloormuscletonefollowingpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryusinganovelintravaginalpressuresensordevice AT limmolly pilotstudytoevaluatechangesinpelvicfloormuscletonefollowingpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryusinganovelintravaginalpressuresensordevice AT pedofskylaura pilotstudytoevaluatechangesinpelvicfloormuscletonefollowingpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryusinganovelintravaginalpressuresensordevice AT krugerjennifer pilotstudytoevaluatechangesinpelvicfloormuscletonefollowingpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryusinganovelintravaginalpressuresensordevice AT budgettdavid pilotstudytoevaluatechangesinpelvicfloormuscletonefollowingpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryusinganovelintravaginalpressuresensordevice AT jhaswati pilotstudytoevaluatechangesinpelvicfloormuscletonefollowingpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryusinganovelintravaginalpressuresensordevice |