The effect of posterior wall support defects on urodynamic indices in stress urinary incontinence

Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States
Obstetrics and Gynecology (Impact Factor: 4.37). 05/1998; 91(5 Pt 1):710-4. DOI: 10.1016/S0029-7844(98)00049-0
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To determine if posterior vaginal wall defects affect urodynamic indices and mask stress urinary incontinence.
Ninety women with grade 0, 1, 2, or 3 posterior wall defects were evaluated prospectively by complete urodynamics to assess their urinary complaints. None had severe anterior or apical support defects. Urethral pressure profilometry and cough stress test were performed with the posterior wall in the unretracted position and then with the posterior wall retracted using a split speculum. Analysis of covariance was used to compare adjusted mean differences in maximum urethral closure pressure, functional urethral length, and units of leakage volume during the cough stress test in the unretracted and retracted positions among the posterior wall grade groups.
In women with grade 3 posterior wall defects, there were significant changes from the unretracted to the retracted position in maximum urethral closure pressure of -7.0 cm H20, (99% confidence interval [CI] -12.4, -1.6), functional urethral length of -0.3 cm (99% CI -0.5, -0.1), and leak volume units of +0.7 (99% CI 0.4, 1.0) during the cough stress test. There were four women with grade 3 posterior wall defects who demonstrated potential stress incontinence when their posterior wall was retracted.
A grade 3 posterior wall defect may artificially raise maximum urethral closure pressure, increase functional urethral length, and mask urinary stress incontinence during a cough stress test. Women with grade 3 posterior wall defects should be tested with the posterior wall retracted during urodynamic evaluation.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Die posteriore Kolporrhaphie wurde im 19, Jahrhundert eingeführt. Ziel des Verfahrens war es, die Scheide und den Hiatus genitalis so zu verengen, dass die pelvinen Organe eine neue Auflage bekommen und somit erneut Halt im Becken finden. Bei der klassischen posterioren Kolporrhaphie zeigen sich Erfolgsraten von 76–96%. Alternativ zur klassischen posterioren Kolporrhaphie hat Richardson den spezifischen Defekt-Repair beschrieben. Hier finden sich Erfolgsraten von 56–100% (Cundiff u. Fenner 2004).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Urodynamic studies refer to any tests that provide objective information about lower urinary tract function with the goal of evaluating bladder and urethral function. Pre-operative urodynamic testing is commonly performed prior to urogynecologic procedures for urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. Although the utility of preoperative urodynamics testing before urogynecologic procedures have been challenged in the literature, the preoperative utilization of urodynamic testing in women with complex voiding dysfunction or associated conditions such as prolapse or urethral diverticulum is still considered important for surgical planning and pre-operative counseling.
    Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology 10/2013; 21(2). DOI:10.1016/j.jmig.2013.10.002 · 1.58 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Stress incontinence with vaginal prolapse reduction is less common in women with posterior-predominant prolapse (rectocele) compared with those with anterior-predominant prolapse (cystocele). This was a secondary analysis of a cohort of prospectively enrolled women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse at or beyond the hymen and prolapse-reduced stress urinary incontinence (SUI) testing. Subjects were included if they had anterior- or posterior-predominant prolapse with at least a 1 cm difference in pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) points Ba and Bp (N = 214). We evaluated the prevalence and risk factors of post-reduction SUI between the two groups. Comparing posterior (n = 45) and anterior (n = 169) prolapse groups, we identified similar rates of post-reduction SUI (posterior: 6/45, 13.3 %; anterior:18/169, 10.7 %; p = 0.52) and SUI without reduction (posterior:4.4 %; anterior:11.2 %; p = 0.26). Maximum prolapse size was slightly larger in anterior than in posterior patients (+3.1 vs +2.0 cm beyond the hymen, p = 0.001), while a higher proportion of posterior subjects reported a prior hysterectomy (p = 0.04). Among posterior subjects, lower maximum urethral closure pressure values (MUCP; p = 0.02) were associated with post-reduction SUI. In contrast, among anterior-predominant prolapse, larger prolapse measured at POP-Q point Ba (p = 0.003) and maximum POP-Q measurement (p = 0.006) were each associated with higher rates of post-reduction SUI and were highly correlated with each other (R = 0.90). We observed similar rates of post-reduction SUI in women with anterior- and posterior-predominant pelvic organ prolapse. Factors affecting the anterior and posterior prolapse groups differed, suggesting different mechanisms of continence protection. These findings suggest that reduction incontinence testing for operative planning would be as relevant to posterior-predominant prolapses as it is to anterior prolapse.
    International Urogynecology Journal 01/2013; 24(8). DOI:10.1007/s00192-012-2019-1 · 2.16 Impact Factor