Objectives: To assess how site of pelvic organ prolapse repair affects overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms, we compared change in OAB symptoms in women undergoing isolated anterior/apical (AA) repair versus isolated posterior (P) repair.
Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of women with bothersome OAB undergoing either AA or P prolapse repair. The subjects completed the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory short form and the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-q) validated questionnaires preoperatively and 6 weeks postoperatively. Our primary outcome was OAB-q symptom severity (SS) change score (preoperative minus postoperative score) compared between the 2 groups.
Results: Of 175 subjects, 133 (76%) underwent AA repair and 42 (24%) underwent P repair. Baseline OAB-q SS scores and baseline characteristics were similar except that the AA group had more severe baseline prolapse (median pelvic organ prolapse quantification stage 3 for AA [interquartile range, 2–3] vs stage 2 for P [interquartile range, 1–3]; P<0.01] and a higher rate of concomitant midurethral sling (57% in AA vs 31% in P; P<0.01). Overall OAB symptoms significantly improved within 6 weeks of surgery (P<0.01). The mean±SD OAB-q SS change score was higher in the AA repair group (26±24 in AA vs 13 ± 28 in P; P=0.01), indicating greater improvement in OAB symptom severity after AA repair. In linear regression adjusting for age, body mass index, diabetes, stress urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse quantification stage, anticholinergic use, and midurethral sling, this difference did not remain significant.
Conclusions: Patients have significant improvement in OAB symptoms after POP repair. In adjusted analyses, there was no difference in improvement in OAB-q SS scores in the patients who had AA versus P repair.
Patients undergoing POP repair having significant improvement in OAB symptoms after surgery. In adjusted analyses, there was no difference in improvement in OAB-q SS scores in patients undergoing anterior/apical repair versus posterior repair.
From the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Urogynecology & Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC.
Reprints: Alexis A. Dieter, MD, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Urogynecology & Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, 5324 McFarland Dr, Suite 310, Durham, NC 27707. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org.
The authors have declared they have no conflicts of interest.