Hysterectomy versus uterine preservation for pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a prospective cohort study
This study adds real-world evidence to the growing body of research supportive of uterine-preserving surgery as a safe, efficient, and effective alternative to hysterectomy during native tissue prolapse repair. Given mounting evidence on safety, efficiency, and effectiveness of uterine-preserving surgery and its alignment with the preferences of approximately half of patients to keep their uterus, the standard of care should include routine offering and patient choice between uterine-preserving and hysterectomy-based surgery for pelvic organ prolapse.
Authors
- Colin Birch (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4608-9093)
- Jena Hall (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3011-5434)
- Magali Robert (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5429-9843)
- Shunaha Kim-Fine (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5961-9305)
- Natalie V. Scime (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5811-7661)
- Alison Carter Ramirez (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3806-0637)
- B Huang (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-7579-5890)
- Erin A. Brennand
- Allison D Edwards
Institutions
- Alberta Health Services (CA)
- University of Alberta (CA)
- University of Calgary (CA)
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Scarborough Health Network (CA)
- University of Alberta Hospital (CA)
Publication Details
- Journal
- American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Published
- 2024-10-18
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2024.10.021
- Citations
- 7
- Primary Topic
- Pelvic floor disorders treatments
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 3.29
Funders
- Alberta Health Services
- M.S.I. Foundation
- University of Alberta
- University of Toronto
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research
- University of Toronto Scarborough