Trends in apical prolapse surgery between 2010 and 2016 in Denmark
- 17 Downloads
Introduction and hypothesis
Pelvic organ prolapse is a common diagnosis. Today there is no consensus on the ideal operation technique for apical prolapse. Vaginal hysterectomy with suspension of the vaginal cuff is the most frequently used, but the popularity of uterus-preserving techniques is increasing. The aim of this study was to describe trends in surgical techniques used to treat primary apical prolapse in Danish hospitals.
Data were obtained from the Danish Urogynecological Database and included women with primary prolapse surgery in the apical compartment operated in Denmark 2010–2016. Public hospital departments were divided into three categories according to degree of urogynecological specialization: high level, moderate level, and no specialization.
The number of vaginal hysterectomies decreased and the number of uterus-preserving operations increased from 2010 to 2016. The proportion of uterus-preserving techniques versus vaginal hysterectomy differed substantially between different hospital types. At departments with high and moderate levels of specialization, uterus-preserving techniques increased during the period, accounting for nearly 90% and 40%, respectively, in 2016, while decreasing to < 35% for departments with no specialization.
Three of the four departments with high-level specialization preferred the Manchester-Fothergill procedure, while one preferred sacrospinous hysteropexy.
Only 2.3% of all procedures were performed at private hospitals.
The proportion of uterus-preserving techniques to treat apical prolapse increased from 2010 to 2016. However, there is a wide variation in practice at the different hospitals. An agreement on uterus-preserving techniques has not been reached.
KeywordsPelvic organ prolapse (POP) Apical prolapse Manchester-Fothergill procedure Vaginal hysterectomy Sacrospinous hysteropexy
The American Society of Anesthesiologist
Body mass index
The Danish Urogynecological Database
Vaginal hysterectomy with suspension of the vaginal cuff
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
K.R. Husby has no financial disclaimers.
G. Lose has no disclosures.
N. Klarskov has, outside the study, received personal fees from Astellas Pharma.
- 4.Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, et al. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010:CD004014. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004014.pub4.
- 5.Tolstrup CK, Lose G, Klarskov N. The Manchester procedure versus vaginal hysterectomy in the treatment of uterine prolapse: a review. Int Urogynecol J. 2016:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3100-y.
- 13.Zacche MM, Mukhopadhyay S, Giarenis I. Trends in prolapse surgery in England. Int Urogynecol J. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-018-3731-2.
- 15.Slopnick EA, Andrey P, David S, et al. Surgical trends and patient factors associated with the treatment of apical pelvic organ prolapse from a national sample. Int Urogynecol J. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-018-3769-1.
- 18.Halpern-Elenskaia K, Umek W, Bodner-Adler B, Hanzal E. Anterior colporrhaphy: a standard operation? Systematic review of the technical aspects of a common procedure in randomized controlled trials. Int Urogynecol J. 2018;29:781–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3510-5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar