Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Revista Urología Colombiana / Colombian Urology Journal 2021; 30(01): 040-047
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1714723
Original Article | Artículo Original
Functional Urology | Urología Funcional

Prolapso de cúpula vaginal, prevalencia en mujeres en climaterio, en el Quindío, Colombia, 2007-2017

Vaginal Vault Prolapse, Prevalence in Women in Climacteric, in Quindío, Colombia, 2007-2017
Franklin José Espitia De La Hoz 
1   Ginecología y Obstetricia, Universidad Militar nueva Granada, Bogota, Columbia
2   Sexología Clínica, Universidad de Alcalá de Henares, Madrid, Spain
3   Uroginecología / FUCS, Hospital de San José / Unicamp, Brasil
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Resumen

Objetivo establecer la prevalencia de prolapso de cúpula vaginal en mujeres del Quindío en climaterio, así como los factores asociados a su aparición.

Métodos Se realizó un estudio de corte transversal. Se evaluaron retrospectivamente las historias clínicas de 3,576 pacientes ambulatorias, en una clínica de alta complejidad de la ciudad de Armenia (Quindío), Colombia; entre enero de 2007 y junio de 2017. Se determinó la prevalencia de prolapso de cúpula vaginal y se analizaron los datos socio-demográficos, clínicos y quirúrgicos.

Resultados La edad media en las mujeres fue de 59,7 ± 14,7 años, con predominancia de las hispánicas (58,5%). La prevalencia de prolapso de cúpula vaginal fue del 14,17%. En el subgrupo de mujeres histerectomizadas, la prevalencia fue del 21,64% en las realizadas por prolapso y del 6,34% en las hechas vía abdominal. En el análisis multivariado, los factores asociados a prolapso de cúpula vaginal fueron: 65 o más años (OR: 4,76; 1,57–20,82), IMC[3] 25 (OR: 8,42; 2,68–31,04), multíparas (OR: 9,03; 2,75–32.27), antecedente de cirugía vaginal (OR: 7.04; 1.96–28.49) y presencia de enfermedades pulmonares crónicas (OR: 5,31; 1,64–23,57).

Conclusión la prevalencia global de prolapso de cúpula vaginal, en las mujeres del Quindío, fue del 14,17%. En Colombia existen pocos datos registrados al respecto, pero con la información presente, se manifiesta la necesidad de elaborar efectivas estrategias de prevención, detección y manejo.

Abstract

Objective To establish the prevalence of vaginal dome prolapse in women of Quindío in climacteric, as well as the factors associated with its appearance.

Methods A cross-sectional study was performed. The medical records of 3,576 outpatients were retrospectively evaluated in a highly complex clinic in the city of Armenia (Quindío), Colombia; between January 2007 and June 2017. The prevalence of vaginal vault prolapse was determined and socio-demographic, clinical and surgical data were analyzed.

Results The mean age in women was 59.7 ± 14.7 years, with a predominance of Hispanic women (58.5%). The prevalence of vaginal vault prolapse was 14.17%. In the subgroup of hysterectomized women, the prevalence was 21.64% in those performed for prolapse and 6.34% in those performed by the abdominal route. In the multivariate analysis, the factors associated with vaginal dome prolapse were: 65 or more years (OR: 4.76; 1.57–20.82), BMI[3] 25 (OR: 8.42; 2.68–31.04), multiparous (OR: 9.03; 2.75–32.27), a history of vaginal surgery (OR: 7.04; 1.96–28.49) and presence of chronic lung diseases (OR: 5.31; 1.64–23.57).

Conclusion The overall prevalence of vaginal dome prolapse, in Quindío women, was 14.17%. In Colombia there are few registered data in this regard, but with the present information, there is a need to develop effective prevention, detection and management strategies.

Palabras clave

prolapso de la cúpula vaginal - prevalencia - mujeres - factores de riesgo - histerectomía

Keywords

vaginal vault prolapsed - mesh - prevalence - women - risk factors - hysterectomy


Publication History

Received: 15 January 2020

Accepted: 17 June 2020

Article published online:
18 August 2020

© 2020. Sociedad Colombiana de Urología. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • Referencias

  • 1 Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M. et al; Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn 2002; 21 (02) 167-178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Valaitis SR, Stanton SL. Sacrocolpopexy: a retrospective study of a clinician's experience. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1994; 101 (06) 518-522
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Mant J, Painter R, Vessey M. Epidemiology of genital prolapse: observations from the Oxford Family Planning Association Study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997; 104 (05) 579-585
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Flynn BJ, Webster GD. Surgical management of the apical vaginal defect. Curr Opin Urol 2002; 12 (04) 353-358
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 DeLancey JO. Anatomic aspects of vaginal eversion after hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 166 (6 Pt 1): 1717-1724, discussion 1724–1728
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Blandon RE, Bharucha AE, Melton III LJ. et al. Incidence of pelvic floor repair after hysterectomy: A population-based cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 197 (06) 664.e1-664.e7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Espitia-De La Hoz FJ. Factores de riesgo asociados con prolapso genital femenino: estudio de casos y controles. Urol Colomb 2015; 24 (01) 12-18 DOI: 10.1016/j.uroco.2015.03.003.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Wu MP, Long CY, Huang KH, Chu CC, Liang CC, Tang CH. Changing trends of surgical approaches for uterine prolapse: an 11-year population-based nationwide descriptive study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2012; 23 (07) 865-872 DOI: 10.1007/s00192-011-1647-1.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Sederl J. Zur operation des prolapses der blind endigenden sheiden. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 1958; 18: 824-828
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bø K. et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 175 (01) 10-17
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Portman DJ, Gass ML. Vulvovaginal Atrophy Terminology Consensus Conference Panel. Genitourinary syndrome of menopause: new terminology for vulvovaginal atrophy from the International Society for the Study of Women's Sexual Health and the North American Menopause Society. Menopause 2014; 21 (10) 1063-1068 DOI: 10.1097/GME.0000000000000329.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Dunton JD, Mikuta J. Posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse. Postgrad Obstet Gynecol 1988; 8: 1-6
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Symmonds RE, Williams TJ, Lee RA, Webb MJ. Posthysterectomy enterocele and vaginal vault prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1981; 140 (08) 852-859
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Dällenbach P, Kaelin-Gambirasio I, Jacob S, Dubuisson JB, Boulvain M. Incidence rate and risk factors for vaginal vault prolapse repair after hysterectomy. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2008; 19 (12) 1623-1629 DOI: 10.1007/s00192-008-0718-4.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Marchionni M, Bracco GL, Checcucci V. et al. True incidence of vaginal vault prolapse. Thirteen years of experience. J Reprod Med 1999; 44 (08) 679-684
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Echavarria-Restrepo LG. Fijación sacroespinosa en el manejo del prolapso de cúpula vaginal y hernia pélvica: diez años de experiencia (1992–2002). Rev Colomb Obstet Ginecol 2004; 55 (01) 37-42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Ruiz B, Cortázar PA, Celades JF. Colpopexia sacroespinosa: una alternativa razonable para el manejo del prolapso de cúpula vaginal por vía vaginal. Rev Colomb Obstet Ginecol 1996; 47: 241-245
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Gómez SPI. Tratamiento del prolapso de cúpula vaginal con sacrocolpopexia modificada utilizando dacrón de injerto vascular. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 46 (03) 197-200
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Dällenbach P, Kaelin-Gambirasio I, Dubuisson JB, Boulvain M. Risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse repair after hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 110 (03) 625-632 DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000278567.37925.4e.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Altman D, Falconer C, Cnattingius S, Granath F. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery following hysterectomy on benign indications. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 198 (05) 572.e1-572.e6 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.01.012.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Swift SE, Pound T, Dias JK. Case-control study of etiologic factors in the development of severe pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2001; 12 (03) 187-192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Espitia-De La Hoz. Manejo quirúrgico del prolapso de la cúpula vaginal utilizando mallas de polipropileno y el abordaje por vía vaginal con la fijación bilateral al ligamento sacroespinoso. Rev. Col Menopausia 2017; 23 (02) 70-78
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Lowder JL, Ghetti C, Nikolajski C, Oliphant SS, Zyczynski HM. Body image perceptions in women with pelvic organ prolapse: a qualitative study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011; 204 (05) 441.e1-441.e5 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.12.024.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Chow D, Rodríguez LV. Epidemiology and prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse. Curr Opin Urol 2013; 23 (04) 293-298 DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e3283619ed0.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Espitia-De La Hoz. Orozco-Santiago L, Orozco-Gallego H. Eficacia del reparo de la procidencia genital completa en la recuperación de la sexualidad de las mujeres intervenidas quirúrgicamente. Rev. Col Menopausia 2018; 24 (01) 21-31
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Jelovsek JE, Maher C, Barber MD. Pelvic organ prolapse. Lancet 2007; 369 (9566): 1027-1038 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60462-0.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Goldberg RP, Tomezsko JE, Winkler HA, Koduri S, Culligan PJ, Sand PK. Anterior or posterior sacrospinous vaginal vault suspension: long-term anatomic and functional evaluation. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 98 (02) 199-204
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Colombo M, Milani R. Sacrospinous ligament fixation and modified McCall culdoplasty during vaginal hysterectomy for advanced uterovaginal prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 179 (01) 13-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Vergeldt TF, Weemhoff M, IntHout J, Kluivers KB. Risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse and its recurrence: a systematic review. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2015; 26 (11) 1559-1573 DOI: 10.1007/s00192-015-2695-8.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Espitia-De La Hoz FJ. Complicaciones del uso del pesario con soporte y sin soporte en el prolapso genital completo. Méd UIS 2015; 28 (03) 309-315
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Braun H, Rojas I, González F, Fernández M, Ortiz JA. Prolapso genital severo: consideraciones clínicas, fisiopatológicas y de técnica quirúrgica al momento de su corrección. Rev Chil Obstet Ginecol 2004; 69 (02) 149-156 DOI: 10.4067/S0717-75262004000200010.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar