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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McConnell, James, Murtagh, Lynsey, Lim, Molly, Pedofsky, Laura, Kruger, Jennifer, Budgett, David, Jha, Swati
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