Md. Barber et al., Accuracy of clinical assessment of paravaginal defects in women with anterior vaginal wall prolapse, AM J OBST G, 181(1), 1999, pp. 87-90
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the accuracy of cli
nical assessment of paravaginal defects in women with anterior vaginal wall
prolapse.
STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective chart review of all women undergoing surgery
for anterior vaginal wall prolapse during the years of 1994 to 1996 identif
ied operative notes that described the surgical assessment of paravaginal s
upport. These surgical findings were compared with the preoperative clinica
l assessment. Clinical parameters that predicted poor correlation were iden
tified. Statistical analysis used the chi(2) test.
RESULTS: One hundred seventeen patients had surgery for anterior vaginal pr
olapse. Seventy had documentation of an intraoperative paravaginal support
evaluation. Of these. 44 patients had vaginal procedures, and 26 had abdomi
nal procedures. All patients had at least stage 2 prolapse before surgery,
and all were noted to have excellent pelvic support 4 to 6 weeks after surg
ery. The prevalence of paravaginal defects at surgery was 47% on the right
and 41% on the left. The sensitivity and negative predictive value for the
clinical assessment for paravaginal defects were good on both the right and
Left sides, whereas the specificity and positive predictive values were po
or. Stage of prolapse, previous hysterectomy, or previous anterior colporrh
aphy did not significantly affect the accuracy of the clinical examination
in predicting fascial defects. However, previous retropubic urethropexy did
significantly decrease the accuracy of the clinical examination in predict
ing right paravaginal defects (P < .01) but not left.
CONCLUSION: Although preoperative clinical assessment for paravaginal defec
ts is useful, it does not substitute for careful intraoperative evaluation
for endopelvic fascial defects.