Advertisement

Subgroups of failure after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse and associations with quality of life outcomes: a longitudinal cluster analysis

      Background

      Treatment outcomes after pelvic organ prolapse surgery are often presented as dichotomous “success or failure” based on anatomic and symptom criteria. However, clinical experience suggests that some women with outcome “failures” are asymptomatic and perceive their surgery to be successful and that other women have anatomic resolution but continue to report symptoms. Characterizing failure types could be a useful step to clarify definitions of success, understand mechanisms of failure, and identify individuals who may benefit from specific therapies.

      Objective

      This study aimed to identify clusters of women with similar failure patterns over time and assess associations among clusters and the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory, Short-Form Six-Dimension health index, Patient Global Impression of Improvement, patient satisfaction item questionnaire, and quality-adjusted life-year.

      Study Design

      Outcomes were evaluated for up to 5 years in a cohort of participants (N=709) with stage ≥2 pelvic organ prolapse who underwent surgical pelvic organ prolapse repair and had sufficient follow-up in 1 of 4 multicenter surgical trials conducted by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. Surgical success was defined as a composite measure requiring anatomic success (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system points Ba, Bp, and C of ≤0), subjective success (absence of bothersome vaginal bulge symptoms), and absence of retreatment for pelvic organ prolapse. Participants who experienced surgical failure and attended ≥4 visits from baseline to 60 months after surgery were longitudinally clustered, accounting for similar trajectories in Ba, Bp, and C and degree of vaginal bulge bother; moreover, missing data were imputed. Participants with surgical success were grouped into a separate cluster.

      Results

      Surgical failure was reported in 276 of 709 women (39%) included in the analysis. Failures clustered into the following 4 mutually exclusive subgroups: (1) asymptomatic intermittent anterior wall failures, (2) symptomatic intermittent anterior wall failures, (3) asymptomatic intermittent anterior and posterior wall failures, and (4) symptomatic all-compartment failures. Each cluster had different bulge symptoms, anatomy, and retreatment associations with quality of life outcomes. Asymptomatic intermittent anterior wall failures (n=150) were similar to surgical successes with Ba values that averaged around −1 cm but fluctuated between anatomic success (Ba≤0) and failure (Ba>0) over time. Symptomatic intermittent anterior wall failures (n=82) were anatomically similar to asymptomatic intermittent anterior failures, but women in this cluster persistently reported bothersome bulge symptoms and the lowest quality of life, Short-Form Six-Dimension health index scores, and perceived success. Women with asymptomatic intermittent anterior and posterior wall failures (n=28) had the most severe preoperative pelvic organ prolapse but the lowest symptomatic failure rate and retreatment rate. Participants with symptomatic all-compartment failures (n=16) had symptomatic and anatomic failure early after surgery and the highest retreatment of any cluster.

      Conclusion

      In particular, the following 4 clusters of pelvic organ prolapse surgical failure were identified in participants up to 5 years after pelvic organ prolapse surgery: asymptomatic intermittent anterior wall failures, symptomatic intermittent anterior wall failures, asymptomatic intermittent anterior and posterior wall failures, and symptomatic all-compartment failures. These groups provide granularity about the nature of surgical failures after pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Future work is planned for predicting these distinct outcomes using patient characteristics that can be used for counseling women individually.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Barber M.D.
        • Brubaker L.
        • Nygaard I.
        • et al.
        Defining success after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 114: 600-609
        • Barber M.D.
        • Maher C.
        Epidemiology and outcome assessment of pelvic organ prolapse.
        Int Urogynecol J. 2013; 24: 1783-1790
        • Brubaker L.
        • Cundiff G.W.
        • Fine P.
        • et al.
        Abdominal sacrocolpopexy with Burch colposuspension to reduce urinary stress incontinence.
        N Engl J Med. 2006; 354: 1557-1566
        • Nygaard I.
        • Brubaker L.
        • Zyczynski H.M.
        • et al.
        Long-term outcomes following abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse.
        JAMA. 2013; 309: 2016-2024
        • Wei J.T.
        • Nygaard I.
        • Richter H.E.
        • et al.
        A midurethral sling to reduce incontinence after vaginal prolapse repair.
        N Engl J Med. 2012; 366: 2358-2367
        • Barber M.D.
        • Brubaker L.
        • Menefee S.
        • et al.
        Operations and pelvic muscle training in the management of apical support loss (OPTIMAL) trial: design and methods.
        Contemp Clin Trials. 2009; 30: 178-189
        • Jelovsek J.E.
        • Barber M.D.
        • Brubaker L.
        • et al.
        Effect of uterosacral ligament suspension vs sacrospinous ligament fixation with or without perioperative behavioral therapy for pelvic organ vaginal prolapse on surgical outcomes and prolapse symptoms at 5 years in the OPTIMAL randomized clinical trial.
        JAMA. 2018; 319: 1554-1565
        • Nager C.W.
        • Visco A.G.
        • Richter H.E.
        • et al.
        Effect of vaginal mesh hysteropexy vs vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension on treatment failure in women with uterovaginal prolapse: a randomized clinical trial.
        JAMA. 2019; 322: 1054-1065
        • Barber M.D.
        • Brubaker L.
        • Burgio K.L.
        • et al.
        Comparison of 2 transvaginal surgical approaches and perioperative behavioral therapy for apical vaginal prolapse: the OPTIMAL randomized trial.
        JAMA. 2014; 311: 1023-1034
        • Bump R.C.
        • Mattiasson A.
        • Bø K.
        • et al.
        The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996; 175: 10-17
        • Barber M.D.
        • Kuchibhatla M.N.
        • Pieper C.F.
        • Bump R.C.
        Psychometric evaluation of 2 comprehensive condition-specific quality of life instruments for women with pelvic floor disorders.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 185: 1388-1395
        • Barber M.D.
        • Walters M.D.
        • Bump R.C.
        Short forms of two condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7).
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 193: 103-113
        • Brazier J.E.
        • Roberts J.
        The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12.
        Med Care. 2004; 42: 851-859
        • Brazier J.
        • Roberts J.
        • Deverill M.
        The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36.
        J Health Econ. 2002; 21: 271-292
        • Yalcin I.
        • Bump R.C.
        Validation of two global impression questionnaires for incontinence.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 189: 98-101
        • Genolini C.
        • Lacombe A.
        • Écochard R.
        • Subtil F.
        CopyMean: a new method to predict monotone missing values in longitudinal studies.
        Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2016; 132: 29-44
        • James G.
        • Witten D.
        • Hastie T.
        • Tibshirani R.
        An introduction to statistical learning: with applications in R.
        Springer, New York, United States2013
        • Genolini C.
        • Alacoque X.
        • Sentenac M.
        • Arnaud C.
        kml and kml3d: R packages to cluster longitudinal data.
        J Stat Softw. 2015; 65: 1-34