Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Supportive Devices

  • Chapter
Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery

Abstract

Pessaries were developed many centuries ago to manage troublesome genital prolapse in an era when surgical management was not an option. In 1867, according to the American Medical Association, there were 123 types of pessaries available [1]. During the last century, the improved safety of surgical intervention for the treatment of prolapse resulted in the decline of pessary use. Pessaries were even viewed as dangerous as they were known to cause the occasional fistula when left unattended. Pessaries are currently experiencing a rebirth in both design and in indications for use. Pessaries and related supportive devices are now viewed as an excellent conservative management alternative for the treatment of urinary incontinence and pelvic floor prolapse, as well as a useful diagnostic tool to determine the appropriate surgical procedure for pelvic floor reconstruction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Zeitlin MP, Lebherz TB. Pessaries in the geriatric patient. J Am Geriatr Soc 1992;40:635–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Wood NJ. The use of vaginal pessaries for uterine prolapse. Nurse Pract 1992;17(7):31–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Miller DS. Contemporary use of the pessary. In: Sciarra JJ, editor. Gynecology and Obstetrics: Clinical Gynecology, Vol. 1, Rev edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1999;1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Speert H. A pictorial history of gynecology and obstetrics. Iconographia Gyniatrica. Philadelphia: Davis, 1973;463–9.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Deger RB, Menzin AW, Mikuta JJ. The vaginal pessary: past and present. Postgrad Obstet Gynecol 1993;13(18):1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wu V, Farrell SA, Baskett TF, Flowerdew G. A simplified protocol for pessary management. Obstet Gynecol 1997;90(6):990–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Moore KN, Flood CG, Griffiths DJ. Pessary use for stress urinary incontinence. J Soc Obstet Gynaecol Can 1994;16:2231–7.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bhatia NN, Bergman A, Gunning JE. Urodynamic effects of a vaginal pessary in women with stress urinary incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1983;147:876–84.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bergman A, Koonings PP, Ballard CA. Predicting post operative urinary incontinence development in women undergoing operation for genitourinary prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1988;158:1171–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Fianu S. Preoperative screening for latent stress incontinence in women with cystocele. Neurourol Urodyn 1985;4:3–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hextall A, Boos K, Cardoza L, Tooz-Hobson P, Anders K, Khullar V. Videocystourethrography with a ring pessary in situ. A clinically useful pre-operative investigation for continent women with urogenital prolapse? Int Urogynecol J 1998;9:205–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Gibbons JM, Paley WB. The incarcerated pessary. Obstet Gynecol 1969;33:842.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Colmer WM, Hattiesburg MD. Use of the pessary. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1953;65(1):170–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Flood CG, Drutz HP, DelaCruz A, Brown D. Urogynecology training in obstetrics and gynaecology programs across Canada. J Soc Obstet Gynaecol Can 1997;19:51–7.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Farrell S. Practical advice for ring pessary fitting and management. J Soc Obstet Gynaecol Can 1997;19:625–32.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Buckley P, McInerey PD, Stephenson TP. Actinomycotic vesicuterine fistula from a wishbone pessary contraceptive device. Br J Urol 1991;68:206–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Grody MH, Nyirjesy P, Chatwani A. Intravesical foreign body and vesicovaginal fistula: A rare complication of a neglected pessary. Int Urogynecol J 1999;10:407–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Sulek P, Kuehl T, Shull B. Vaginal pessaries and their use in pelvic relaxation. J Reprod Med 1993;38(12):919–23.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Suarez G, Baum NH, Jacobs J. Use of the standard contraceptive diaphragm in management of stress incontinence. Urology 1991;37:119–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Nygaard I. Prevention of exercise incontinence with mechanical devices. J Reprod Med 1995;40(2):89–94.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Staskin D, Bavendam T, Miller J, Davila G, Diokno A, Knapp P, Rappaport S, Sand P, Sant G, Tutrone R. Effectiveness of a urinary control insert in the management of stress urinary incontinence: Early results of a multi-center study. Urology 1996:47:629–36.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Versi E, Harvey MA. Efficacy of an external urethral device in women with genuine stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 1998;9:271–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Thyssen HH, Lose G. Long-term efficacy and safety of a disposable vaginal device (Continence Guard) in the treatment of female stress incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 1997;8:130–3.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Sander P, Thyssen H, Lose G, Andersen JT. Effect of a vaginal device on quality of life with urinary stress incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 1999;93(3):407–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Thyssen H, Sanders P, Lose G. A vaginal device (Continence Guard) in the management of urge incontinence in women. Int Urogynecol J 1999;10:219–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Urogynecology Clinic Women’s Health Clinic, Royal Alexandra Hospital, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

    Dr Cathy Flood (Associate Professor) & Lesley-Ann Hanson RN BSc

Authors
  1. Dr Cathy Flood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lesley-Ann Hanson RN BSc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Urogynecology Unit, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    H. P. Drutz BA, MD, FRC(C), FACOG, FSOGC

  2. Division of Urology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    S. Herschorn BSc, MDCM, FRCSC

  3. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    N. E. Diamant MD, FRCP(C)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Flood, C., Hanson, LA. (2003). Supportive Devices. In: Drutz, H.P., Herschorn, S., Diamant, N.E. (eds) Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-238-1_26

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-238-1_26

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84628-237-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84628-238-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation