Ann-Sophie Page , Eline Borowski , Emma Bauters , Susanne Housmans , Frank Van der Aa , Jan Deprest
{"title":"Vaginal erbium laser versus pelvic floor exercises for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: A randomised controlled trial","authors":"Ann-Sophie Page , Eline Borowski , Emma Bauters , Susanne Housmans , Frank Van der Aa , Jan Deprest","doi":"10.1016/j.ejogrb.2024.10.042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>To compare the efficacy of Er:YAG laser for mild to moderate pelvic organ prolapse (POP) to that of pelvic floor exercises (PFE).</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Single center randomised controlled trial.</div></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><div>Tertiary center, Belgium.</div></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><div>Forty-six women with mild to moderate prolapse were enrolled (23 in each group). There were no missing data for the primary outcome; three patients were lost to follow-up at 24-months.</div></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><div>Comparison of vaginal laser treatment (3–6 applications) to PFE (9–18 sessions).</div></div><div><h3>Main outcome measures</h3><div>Subjective change in prolapse symptoms at four months from baseline measured by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory-6 (POPDI-6) (primary), adverse events, other subjective outcomes and independent anatomical assessment up to 24 months.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The mean difference in POPDI-6 scores at 4 months was 1.09 (95 %CI = −6.02;8.12), showing non-inferiority of laser to PFE (p = 0.004). Within groups, the difference in mean POPDI-6 four months following the start of therapy tended to be lower for laser-treatment (65.2 % (15/23) of laser-participants were ‘better’ or ‘much better’) than for PFE (60.9 % (14/23) in the PFE group), yet without difference between groups (OR = 1.21; 95 %CI = 0.39–3.23). There were no obvious between group differences in any other subjective nor objective outcomes. At 24 months, 50 % (11/22) of laser-patients and 43 % (9/21) of PFE-patients requested additional, yet alternative treatment. There were no serious adverse events at any time-point.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Vaginal laser application and PFE improve symptoms of mild and moderate prolapse to a similar extent. Both treatments had a measurable yet not durable effect. There were no adverse events in either arm.</div></div><div><h3>Trial registration</h3><div><span><span>ClinicalTrials.gov</span><svg><path></path></svg></span>(NCT04523298).</div></div><div><h3>Funding</h3><div>The laser device was provided by Fotona, Slovenia for the duration of this trial.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11975,"journal":{"name":"European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology","volume":"303 ","pages":"Pages 165-170"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301211524005888","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
To compare the efficacy of Er:YAG laser for mild to moderate pelvic organ prolapse (POP) to that of pelvic floor exercises (PFE).
Design
Single center randomised controlled trial.
Setting
Tertiary center, Belgium.
Participants
Forty-six women with mild to moderate prolapse were enrolled (23 in each group). There were no missing data for the primary outcome; three patients were lost to follow-up at 24-months.
Interventions
Comparison of vaginal laser treatment (3–6 applications) to PFE (9–18 sessions).
Main outcome measures
Subjective change in prolapse symptoms at four months from baseline measured by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory-6 (POPDI-6) (primary), adverse events, other subjective outcomes and independent anatomical assessment up to 24 months.
Results
The mean difference in POPDI-6 scores at 4 months was 1.09 (95 %CI = −6.02;8.12), showing non-inferiority of laser to PFE (p = 0.004). Within groups, the difference in mean POPDI-6 four months following the start of therapy tended to be lower for laser-treatment (65.2 % (15/23) of laser-participants were ‘better’ or ‘much better’) than for PFE (60.9 % (14/23) in the PFE group), yet without difference between groups (OR = 1.21; 95 %CI = 0.39–3.23). There were no obvious between group differences in any other subjective nor objective outcomes. At 24 months, 50 % (11/22) of laser-patients and 43 % (9/21) of PFE-patients requested additional, yet alternative treatment. There were no serious adverse events at any time-point.
Conclusions
Vaginal laser application and PFE improve symptoms of mild and moderate prolapse to a similar extent. Both treatments had a measurable yet not durable effect. There were no adverse events in either arm.
Trial registration
ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT04523298).
Funding
The laser device was provided by Fotona, Slovenia for the duration of this trial.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology is the leading general clinical journal covering the continent. It publishes peer reviewed original research articles, as well as a wide range of news, book reviews, biographical, historical and educational articles and a lively correspondence section. Fields covered include obstetrics, prenatal diagnosis, maternal-fetal medicine, perinatology, general gynecology, gynecologic oncology, uro-gynecology, reproductive medicine, infertility, reproductive endocrinology, sexual medicine and reproductive ethics. The European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology provides a forum for scientific and clinical professional communication in obstetrics and gynecology throughout Europe and the world.