PURPOSE: Surgical correction of pelvic organ prolapse underwent transformation in the last decade.
Training in pelvic organ prolapse surgery, the ease of mesh kit use, and Food and Drug Administration warnings about mesh have influenced practice patterns. We investigated trends in pelvic organ prolapse procedures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Case logs of pelvic organ prolapse procedures, mesh use and pessary placement were obtained from the American Board of Urology for 2003 to 2012. We evaluated associations between surgeon characteristics and the use of pelvic organ prolapse procedures.
RESULTS: Of 6,355 nonpediatric urologists applying for certification or recertification 2,192, representing a 10% annual sample of all urologists, reported performing pelvic organ prolapse procedures during the study period. The number of procedures increased steadily from 930 in 2003 to 6,978 in 2012. The number of colporrhaphies increased from 806 to 2,670 and the number of colpopexies increased from 32 to 1,414 between 2003 and 2012. The number of vaginal colpopexies increased from 24 to 1,016 during the study period. The number of sacrocolpopexies increased from 8 to 398 with exponential increases in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (282 cases by 2012). Mesh insertion increased from 10 cases reported by applicants in 2005 to 1,552 reported in 2012 (p < 0.0005). Mesh revision, first reported in 2007 with 52 performed, consistently increased to 214 in 2012. Urologists trained in female urology performed a median of 16 pelvic organ prolapse procedures, double the number reported by surgeons trained in other urological fellowships. Urologists of the female gender also reported performing approximately 8 more procedures annually than male urologists.
CONCLUSIONS: The number of pelvic organ prolapse operations done by urologists increased dramatically in the last decade with a similar increase in mesh use. More colpopexies are now performed with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy showing an exponential increase. The recent trend of mesh revision is notable with a much faster rate of increase than mesh insertion.
Written by:
Elterman DS, Chughtai BI, Vertosick E, Maschino A, Eastham JA, Sandhu JS. Are you the author?
Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Brady Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York; Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Reference: J Urol. 2013 Oct 25. pii: S0022-5347(13)05759-5.
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.10.076
PubMed Abstract
PMID: 24513165
UroToday.com Trauma & Reconstruction Section
