Long-Term Outcomes after Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair in Young Women

The aim of the study was to describe the long-term outcomes of Pelvis Organ Prolapse (POP) repair in women under 40 years old. A retrospective chart review of all POP repairs performed in women ≤40 years old between January 1997 and December 2015 in the Gynecologic Surgery Department of Lille University Hospital was performed. Inclusion criteria were all women ≤40 years old who underwent a POP repair with a stage ≥2 POP according to the Baden and Walker classification. The study population was separated into three groups: a sacrohysteropexy group, a vaginal native tissue repair (NTR) group, and a transvaginal mesh surgery (VMS) group. The primary outcome was reoperation procedures for a symptomatic recurrent POP. Secondary outcomes were other complications. During the study period, 43 women ≤ 40 years old who underwent a POP repair were included and separated into three groups: 28 patients (68%), 8 patients (19%), and 7 patients (16%) in the sacrohysteropexy, VMS, and NTR groups respectively. The mean followup time was 83 ± 52 months. POP recurrence, reoperated or not, was essentially diagnosed in the VMS group (87.5%) and the NTR group (50%). POP recurrence repairs were performed for nine patients (21%): 7%, 62.5%, and 25% in the sacrohysteropexy, VMS, and NTR groups, respectively. Global reoperation concerned 10 patients (23%) whatever the type of POP surgery, mainly patients from the VMS group (75%) and from the NTR group (25%). It occurred in only 7% of patients from the sacrohysteropexy group. Two patients (4%) presented a vaginal exposure of the mesh (in the VMS group). De novo stress urinary incontinence was encountered by nine patients (21%): 29% and 12.5% in the sacrohysteropexy and NTR groups, respectively. Despite the risk of recurrence, POP repair should be proposed to young women in order to restore their quality of life. Vaginal native tissue repair or sacrohysteropexy should be performed after explaining to women the advantages and disadvantages of each procedure.