Changes in sexual function over 12 months after native-tissue vaginal pelvic organ prolapse surgery with and without hysterectomy

Abstract

Background: There is a need to determine how preoperative sexual activity, uterine preservation, and hysterectomy affect sexual function after pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Aim: (1) To determine changes in sexual function in women, stratified by preoperative sexual activity status, after native-tissue pelvic organ prolapse surgery. (2) To examine the impact of hysterectomy and uterine preservation on sexual function. (3) To determine predictors for postoperative dyspareunia. Methods: This was a planned secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study. Sexual function was evaluated preoperatively and 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Sexual function was compared between those who had a hysterectomy and those who had uterine-preserving prolapse surgery. A logistic regression analysis was performed to assess predictors for dyspareunia. Outcomes: Pelvic Organ Prolapse-Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire. Results: At 12 months, 59 patients underwent surgery and were followed up (hysterectomy [n = 28, 47.5%] vs no hysterectomy [n = 31, 52.5%]; sexually active [n = 26, 44.1%] vs non-sexually active [n = 33, 55.9%]). Of those who did not undergo a hysterectomy, 17 (54.8%) had a uterine-preserving procedure. At 12 months, sexually active patients had significant improvement in sexual function (mean ± SD, 0.37 ± 0.43; P = .005), while non-sexually active patients reported significant improvement in satisfaction of sex life (P = .04) and not feeling sexually inferior (P = .003) or angry (P = .03) because of prolapse. No variables were associated with dyspareunia on bivariate analysis. Clinical Implications: It did not appear that either uterine preservation or hysterectomy had any impact on sexual function. There was a 10% increase in people who were sexually active after surgery. Strengths and Limitations: The major strength of our study is the use of a condition-specific validated questionnaire intended for sexually active and non-sexually active women. We interpreted our results utilizing a validated minimal clinically important difference score to provide interpretation of our results with statistical and clinical significance. The limitation of our study is that it was a secondary analysis that was not powered for these specific outcomes. Conclusion: At 12 months, for patients who were sexually active preoperatively, there was a clinically meaningful improvement in sexual function after native-tissue pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Non-sexually active women reported improvement in satisfaction of sex life. There was no difference in the sexual function of patients undergoing uterine preservation or posthysterectomy colpopexy when compared with those with concurrent hysterectomy, though this sample size was small.