A survey of pessary use by members of the American Urogynecologic Society

被引:187
作者
Cundiff, GW [1 ]
Weidner, AC [1 ]
Visco, AG [1 ]
Bump, RC [1 ]
Addison, WA [1 ]
机构
[1] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Durham, NC 27710 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0029-7844(00)00788-2
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 [妇产科学];
摘要
Objective: To describe trends in pessary use for pelvic organ prolapse. Methods: An anonymous survey administered to the membership of the American Urogynecologic Society covered indications, management, and choice of pessary for specific support defects. Results: The response rate was 48% (359 of 748). Two hundred fifty surveys were received at the scientific meeting and 109 were returned by mail. Seventy-seven percent used pessaries as first-line therapy for prolapse, while 12% reserved pessaries for women who were not surgical candidates. With respect to specific support defects, 89% used a pessary for anterior defects, 60% for posterior defects, 74% for apical defects, and 76% for complete procidentia. Twenty-two percent used the same pessary, usually a ring pessary, for all support defects. In the 78% who tailored the pessary to the defect, support pessaries were more common for anterior (ring) and apical defects (ring), while space-filling pessaries were more common for posterior defects (donut) and complete procidentia (Gellhorn). Less than half considered a prior hysterectomy or sexual activity contraindications for a pessary, while 64% considered hypoestrogenism a contraindication. Forty-four percent used a different pessary for women with a prior hysterectomy and 59% for women with a weak pelvic diaphragm. Ninety-two percent of physicians believed that pessaries relieve symptoms associated with pelvic organ prolapse, while 48% felt that pessaries also had therapeutic benefit in addition to relieving symptoms. Conclusion: While there are identifiable trends in pessary use, there is no clear consensus regarding the indications for support pessaries compared with space-filling pessaries, or the use of a single pessary for all support defects compared with tailoring the pessary to the specific defect. Randomized clinical trials are needed to define optimal pessary use. (Obstet Gynecol 2000;95:931-5. (C) 2000 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists).
引用
收藏
页码:931 / 935
页数:5
相关论文
共 22 条
[1]
CHRIST ML, 1978, ACTA CYTOL, V22, P146
[2]
Vaginal prolapse - Management with nonsurgical techniques [J].
Davila, GW .
POSTGRADUATE MEDICINE, 1996, 99 (04) :171-&
[3]
Fritzinger K G, 1997, Lippincotts Prim Care Pract, V1, P431
[4]
A VESICOVAGINAL FISTULA AND INTRAVESICAL FOREIGN-BODY - A RARE CASE OF THE NEGLECTED PESSARY [J].
GOLDSTEIN, I ;
WISE, GJ ;
TANCER, ML .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1990, 163 (02) :589-591
[5]
GREENHILL JP, 1972, CLIN OBSTET GYNECOL, V4, P1083
[6]
MILLS WG, 1978, BRIT J HOSP MED, V20, P586
[7]
Treatment of uterine and vaginal prolapse [J].
Morley, GW .
CLINICAL OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1996, 39 (04) :959-969
[8]
Mueller-Heubach E, 1970, J Med Soc N J, V67, P104
[9]
MYERSCOUGH PR, 1972, PRACTITIONER, V208, P470
[10]
OTT R, 1993, BRIT J SURG, V80, P1157