Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Practice Patterns Regarding Apical Support Procedures at Time of Hysterectomy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Hill, Austin M., MD; Pauls, Rachel N., MD; Crisp, Catrina C., MD, MSc

Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery: March 27, 2019 - Volume Publish Ahead of Print - Issue - p
doi: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000716
Original Article: PDF Only

Objectives We sought to understand practice patterns of non–female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery (FPMRS) clinicians regarding concurrent apical support procedures during hysterectomies when primarily performed for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. We also sought to describe differences between those receiving and not receiving apical support.

Methods This retrospective study analyzed medical records of individuals undergoing hysterectomy for the primary indication of pelvic organ prolapse between 2012 and 2017 at all locations within the TriHealth system. Surgeries performed by board-certified FPMRS physicians were excluded. Comparisons were drawn between those who did and did not receive apical support.

Results A total of 236 charts met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 66 (28%) received concurrent apical suspension, and 94 (39.8%) underwent no reconstructive procedures. The annual proportion of those receiving apical suspension did not differ over the course of the study period. On average, the addition of apical support added 39.9 minutes (P < 0.001) to the length of surgery. There was, however, no difference noted in estimated blood loss. Risk factors for recurrent prolapse including chronic constipation, pulmonary disease, and connective tissue disorders were similar between groups.

Conclusion When excluding FPMRS surgeons, data from our institution showed that most patients undergoing hysterectomy for prolapse did not receive concurrent apical support. This suggests areas of potential improvement for adopting into clinical practice the new American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommendations regarding the treatment of prolapse. Furthermore, this may represent an important opportunity for peer outreach and education by FPMRS surgeons.

From TriHealth, Cincinnati, OH.

Correspondence: Austin M. Hill, MD, 3219 Clifton Ave, Suite 100, Cincinnati, OH 45220. E-mail:

No sources of support reported.

The authors have declared that there are no conflicts of interest.

National Trials Registry: NCT03379246.

Copyright © 2019 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.