Richter HE, Burgio K, Goode P, Varner RE, Shore G, Tessler F, Lockhart M, Willis V, Fine PM, Appell RA, Thompson PK, Lotze PM, Frierson N, Nygaard I, Brandt D, Haury D, Kreder K, Bradley CS, Rao S, Cundiff G, Handa V, Sauter ME, Wright J, Brubaker L, FitzGerald MP, Kenton K, Koch D, Ball C, Brown MB, Wei JT, Marchant B, DeLancey JO, Janz NK, Smith DG, Wren PA, Ye W, Imus J, Casher YW, Visco AG, Connolly A, Lavelle J, Loomis MJ, Murphy AK, Wells EC, Whitehead W, Fielding J, Zyczynski H, Borello-France D, Hakim C, Wald A, Gruss JA, Leng W, Moalli PA, Park R, Weber AM.
Source
Department of Gynecology & Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University, 4940 Eastern Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21224, USA. vhanda1@jhmi.edu
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS:
This study describes pelvic organ support after childbirth.
METHODS:
This ancillary analysis of the Childbirth and Pelvic Symptoms Imaging Study compares pelvic organ prolapse quantification 6-12 months after childbirth among three cohorts of primiparous women: vaginal delivery with sphincter tear (n = 106), vaginal delivery without sphincter tear (n = 108), and cesarean without labor (n = 39).
RESULTS:
Of participants, 31.2% had stage II support. Prolapse to or beyond the hymen was present in 14% after vaginal delivery with sphincter tear (95% confidence interval 8%, 22%), 15% (9%, 24%) after vaginal delivery without sphincter tear, and 5% (1%, 17%) after cesarean without labor (p = 0.23). A study of 132 women per group would be required for 80% power to test differences between 5% and 15%.
CONCLUSIONS:
While these data provide insufficient power to dismiss a difference in pelvic organ support between modes of delivery, they add to our understanding of support following childbirth.