Quantcast

Pessary use in advanced pelvic organ prolapse

Research paper by Kenneth Powers, George Lazarou, Andrea Wang, Julie LaCombe, Giti Bensinger, Wilma M. Greston, Magdy S. Mikhail

Indexed on: 10 May '05Published on: 10 May '05Published in: International Urogynecology Journal



Abstract

The objective of this study was to review our experience with pessary use for advanced pelvic organ prolapse. Charts of patients treated for Stage III and IV prolapse were reviewed. Comparisons were made between patients who tried or refused pessary use. A successful trial of pessary was defined by continued use; a failed trial was defined by a patient’s discontinued use. Thirty-two patients tried a pessary; 45 refused. Patients who refused a pessary were younger, had lesser degree of prolapse, and more often had urinary incontinence. Most patients (62.5%) continued pessary use and avoided surgery. Unsuccessful trial of pessary resorting to surgery included four patients (33%) with unwillingness to maintain, three patients (25%) with inability to retain and two patients (17%) with vaginal erosion and/or discharge. Our findings suggest that pessary use is an acceptable first-line option for treatment of advanced pelvic organ prolapse.