The Novel and Minimally Invasive Treatment Modalities for Female Pelvic Floor Muscle Dysfunction; Beyond the Traditional

Year 2018, Volume: 35 Issue: 5, 358 - 366, 01.09.2018

Yiğit Akın Matthew Young Muhammad Elmussareh Nickolaus Charalampogiannis Ali Serdar Gözen

Abstract

Pelvic floor dysfunction is a clinical entity that is prevalent among female patients. Determining the exact underlying cause of pelvic floor dysfunction is difficult, and surgical intervention for this clinical entity may be challenging. Pelvic floor dysfunction can affect the quality of life of the patient by causing stress urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, or both. Well-defined surgical treatment options, minimally invasive approaches, and novel techniques for the treatment of pelvic floor dysfunction have been recently introduced. Here, we evaluated the management options available for patients with stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. We searched Medline and EMBASE databases for relevant articles by using the keywords “pelvic floor dysfunction,” “minimally invasive procedures,” “stress urinary incontinence,” “pelvic organ prolapse,” and “novel techniques”. Traditional treatment options for stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse are beyond the scope of our review. Laparoscopic and robotic surgical treatments for pelvic floor dysfunction continue to evolve and develop. These minimally invasive techniques will soon replace open procedures. Alternative novel treatment modalities have also been developed from novel human-compatible materials and are emerging as successful treatments for stress urinary incontinence. The development of these various treatment options has implications for future surgical practice in the field of uro-gynecology.

Keywords

Minimally invasive surgery, pelvic floor, pelvic organ prolapse, stress urinary incontinence

References

• 1. Shelton AA, Welton ML. The pelvic floor in health and disease. West J Med 1997;167:90-8.
• 2. Cherry DA, Rothenberger DA. Pelvic floor physiology. Surg Clin North Am 1988;68:1217-30.
• 3. Keane DP, Sims TJ, Abrams P, Bailey AJ. Analysis of collagen status in premenopausal nulliparous women with genuine stress incontinence. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997;104: 994-8.
• 4. Thom D. Variations in estimates of urinary incontinence prevalence in the community: effects of differences in definition, population characteristics, and study type. J Am Geriatr Soc 1998;46:473-80.
• 5. Lal M, Pattison HM, Allan TF, Callender R. Postcesarean pelvic floor dysfunction contributes to undisclosed psychosocial morbidity. J Reprod Med 2009;54:53-60.
• 6. Snooks SJ, Swash M, Henry MM, Setchell M. Risk factors in childbirth causing damage to the pelvic floor innervation. Int J Colorectal Dis 1986;1:20-4.
• 7. Saboia DM, Firmiano MLV, Bezerra KC, Vasconcelos JA Neto, Oriá MOB, Vasconcelos CTM. Impact of urinary incontinence types on women's quality of life. Rev Esc Enferm USP 2017;51:e03266.
• 8. Wu JM, Matthews CA, Conover MM, Pate V, Jonsson Funk M. Lifetime risk of stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Obstet Gynecol 2014;123:1201-6.
• 9. Dmochowski RR, Blaivas JM, Gormley EA, Juma S, Karram MM, Lightner DJ, et al. Update of AUA guideline on the surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence. J Urol 2010;183:1906-14.
• 10. Kim S, Harvey MA, Johnston S. A review of the epidemiology and pathophysiology of pelvic floor dysfunction: do racial differences matter? J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2005;27:251-9.