BACKGROUND: Pelvic organ prolapse in pregnancy is rare. Consequent complications include cervical infection, spontaneous abortion, and premature birth. Conservative management by means of a pessary have been described as improving maternal symptomatology and minimizing gestational risk. The delivery mode is controversial.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical courses of patients diagnosed with pelvic organ prolapse during pregnancy, and to present our multidisciplinary approach.
METHODS: In this retrospective case series, we summarized the obstetrical outcomes of women diagnosed with pelvic organ prolapse during pregnancy in a single university-affiliated hospital.
RESULTS: We identified eight women with advanced uterine prolapse at a mean age of 30.3 years. Seven were diagnosed with advanced uterine prolapse (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification [POPQ] stage ≥ 3). All were treated by pessary placement, which was tolerable and provided symptomatic relief. The pessary type was chosen according to the prolapse stage. In women with cervical prolapse POPQ stage > 2 and cervical edema, a support pessary was less beneficial. However, the prolapse was well-controlled with a space-filling Gellhorn pessary. Low complication rates were associated with vaginal deliveries. The few complications that were reported included minor cervical laceration, postpartum hemorrhage, and retained placenta.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of pelvic organ prolapse during pregnancy must be individualized and requires a multidisciplinary approach of urogynecologists, obstetricians, dietitians, pelvic floor physiotherapists, and social workers. Conservative management, consisting of insertion of a vaginal pessary when prolapse symptoms appeared, provided adequate support for the pelvic floor, improved symptomatology, and minimized pregnancy complications. Vaginal delivery was feasible for most of the women.

UNASSIGNED: To study and compare the clinical effects of cervical pessary and progesterone for preventing preterm birth in singleton pregnant women with a short cervical length (CL).
UNASSIGNED: This study was a prospective cohort study. A total of 148 pregnant women with CL≤25 mm, as determined by ultrasound examination performed before 28 weeks of pregnancy, were included in the study. All subjects were admitted to West China Second Hospital, Sichuan University between August 2020 and December 2022. According to their treatment plans, the pregnant women were divided into a cervical pessary group (n=55) and a progesterone group (n=93). Spontaneous preterm birth before 37 weeks of pregnancy was defined as the main outcome index. Preterm birth (abortion) or spontaneous preterm birth (abortion) before 37, 34, 32, 30, and 28 weeks of pregnancy, mean extended gestational age, neonatal morbidity, and neonatal mortality were the secondary outcome indicators. The pregnancy outcomes and the neonatal outcomes of the two groups were compared and statistically analyzed.
UNASSIGNED: There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of preterm birth (including iatrogenic preterm birth, spontaneous preterm birth, and abortion) before 37, 34, 32, 30, and 28 weeks between the cervical pessary group and the progesterone group. When iatrogenic preterm birth was excluded, the incidence of spontaneous preterm birth before 37 weeks was lower in the cervical pessary group (23.6%) than that in the progesterone group (41.9%), with the difference between the two groups being statistically significant (P=0.024). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of spontaneous preterm birth (including miscarriage) before 34, 32, 30, and 28 weeks. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of neonatal morbidity, the rate of transfer to the neonatal care unit after birth, and the neonatal mortality rate between the two groups. Multivariate logistic analysis showed that treatment with cervical pessary was a protective factor for spontaneous preterm birth before 37 weeks compared to progesterone therapy.
UNASSIGNED: Using cervical pessary to prevent spontaneous preterm birth in singleton pregnant women with a short cervical length in the second trimester can significantly reduce the incidence of spontaneous preterm birth before 37 weeks.

Pessaries are removable gynecological prosthetic devices that provide mechanical support for temporary or long-term symptom relief of pelvic floor disorders, such as pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. To date, limited mechanical tests have been performed on physical pessary designs to characterize their behaviour under load; however, custom pessary manufacturing is expensive and time consuming. As an alternative, finite element (FE) modeling can provide detailed numerical insight into the response of a pessary design under load but to date has seen limited application, with little data available for pessary silicone materials. This study aimed to identify hyperelastic material models for two silicone materials used in custom pessary cocoon moulded manufacturing towards FE analysis of ring with support (RWS) pessaries. It was hypothesized that hyperelastic material models could be identified to capture the force and deformation response of multiple RWS sizes under different boundary conditions and silicone materials (Shore 60A and 40A). To understand the material characteristics of pessary silicone, uniaxial tension and compression tests were performed then the experimental data was fit with Mooney-Rivlin (MR) material models. To ensure the material models characterize the pessary behaviour, data from mechanical tests representing the RWS pessary folding and modified 3-point bending were compared to FE recreations (FEBio) of the same tests with the MR materials applied to the pessaries. The FE model results demonstrated good agreement in the force-displacement response for the fold and 3-point bending models for different pessary sizes and silicone stiffnesses. This work demonstrates the hyperelastic material models\' efficacy and will enable future studies to improve biomechanical analysis of silicone pessary designs.

Null.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and synthesise what is known about the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical conservative interventions for the management of urinary incontinence (UI) experienced by women during physical exercise.
METHODS: A systematic search was performed in the following databases in September 2023: the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). Studies were deemed eligible if population consisted of females who reported symptoms of UI while participating in physical exercise, and the interventions involved any non-pharmaceutical conservative treatment to manage symptoms during exercise. The primary outcome was severity of UI signs and symptoms. The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO identifier: CRD42022379138).
RESULTS: Of the 3429 abstracts screened, 19 studies were retained. Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) and intravaginal devices were the most commonly investigated modalities. Only two randomised controlled trials (RCTs), both among volleyball players, compared PFMT with no PFM exercise, showing a reduction in pad weight gain after the intervention in the experimental groups only. PFMT with and without biofeedback randomised among soldiers demonstrated a reduction in the frequency of urine leakage episodes in both groups, while supervised and unsupervised PFMT randomised among athletes from different sports showed pad weight gain reduction in the supervised group only. Seven single-arm studies suggested that PFMT alone or combined with other modalities may reduce UI severity in active women based on questionnaires, bladder diaries, and self-reported symptoms. A single-arm and a crossover study found pessary use beneficial in reducing urine leakage based on questionnaires and pad weight gain, respectively. When comparing pessary, tampon, and no intervention, two repeated-measures studies found tampons may reduce leakage more than pessaries in CrossFit exercisers and women performing aerobic exercises. A vaginal sponge also reduced pad weight gain during aerobic exercises. Other modalities (i.e., an intraurethral device, photobiomodulation, and combined therapies) were investigated using case series or single case studies. While all interventions showed some evidence of effectiveness, the results must be interpreted with caution due to methodological limitations and high risk of bias. In particular, despite a high reliance on pad tests as a primary outcome, we identified inconsistencies in how pad tests were administered and interpreted.
CONCLUSIONS: Only the effectiveness of PFMT to reduce urine leakage during exercise has been evaluated through RCTs, with some evidence of effectiveness. We identified a clear need for higher quality studies, with better reporting on the interventions, and more judicious use and interpretation of outcome measures.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cerclage, cervical pessary, and vaginal progesterone have each been shown to reduce preterm birth (PTB) in high-risk women, but to our knowledge, there has been no randomised comparison of the 3 interventions. The SuPPoRT \"Stitch, Pessary, or Progesterone Randomised Trial\" was designed to compare the rate of PTB <37 weeks between each intervention in women who develop a short cervix in pregnancy.
RESULTS: SuPPoRT was a multicentre, open label 3-arm randomised controlled trial designed to demonstrate equivalence (equivalence margin 20%) conducted from 1 July 2015 to 1 July 2021 in 19 obstetric units in the United Kingdom. Asymptomatic women with singleton pregnancies with transvaginal ultrasound cervical lengths measuring <25 mm between 14+0 and 23+6 weeks\' gestation were eligible for randomisation (1:1:1) to receive either vaginal cervical cerclage (n = 128), cervical pessary (n = 126), or vaginal progesterone (n = 132). Minimisation variables were gestation at recruitment, body mass index (BMI), and risk factor for PTB. The primary outcome was PTB <37 weeks\' gestation. Secondary outcomes included PTB <34 weeks\', <30 weeks\', and adverse perinatal outcome. Analysis was by intention to treat. A total of 386 pregnant women between 14+0 and 23+6 weeks\' gestation with a cervical length <25 mm were randomised to one of the 3 interventions. Of these women, 67% were of white ethnicity, 18% black ethnicity, and 7.5% Asian ethnicity. Mean BMI was 25.6. Over 85% of women had prior risk factors for PTB; 39.1% had experienced a spontaneous PTB or midtrimester loss (>14 weeks gestation); and 45.8% had prior cervical surgery. Data from 381 women were available for outcome analysis. Using binary regression, randomised therapies (cerclage versus pessary versus vaginal progesterone) were found to have similar effects on the primary outcome PTB <37 weeks (39/127 versus 38/122 versus 32/132, p = 0.4, cerclage versus pessary risk difference (RD) -0.7% [-12.1 to 10.7], cerclage versus progesterone RD 6.2% [-5.0 to 17.0], and progesterone versus pessary RD -6.9% [-17.9 to 4.1]). Similarly, no difference was seen for PTB <34 and 30 weeks, nor adverse perinatal outcome. There were some differences in the mild side effect profile between interventions (vaginal discharge and bleeding) and women randomised to progesterone reported more severe abdominal pain. A small proportion of women did not receive the intervention as per protocol; however, per-protocol and as-treated analyses showed similar results. The main study limitation was that the trial was underpowered for neonatal outcomes and was stopped early due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that for women who develop a short cervix, cerclage, pessary, and vaginal progesterone were equally efficacious at preventing PTB, as judged with a 20% equivalence margin. Commencing with any of the therapies would be reasonable clinical management. These results can be used as a counselling tool for clinicians when managing women with a short cervix.
BACKGROUND: EU Clinical Trials register. EudraCT Number: 2015-000456-15, clinicaltrialsregister.eu., ISRCTN Registry: ISRCTN13364447, isrctn.com.

Pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD) is a common clinical problem that can lead to bladder and bowel dysfunction such as urinary incontinence, urinary retention, fecal incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, and sexual dysfunction. Pelvic floor rehabilitation aids are essential tools in the treatment of PFD. However, there is limited understanding of the efficacy and mechanisms of these aids, and there is a lack of standardized guidelines for selecting appropriate aids for different types of PFD. To assist patients in choosing suitable pelvic floor rehabilitation aids to their needs, it is necessary to summarize the existing types, mechanisms, and applications of these aids. Based on their mechanisms and target functions, pelvic floor rehabilitation aids can be mainly categorized into 3 main types. The first type includes aids that improve pelvic floor function, such as vaginal dumbbells, vaginal tampons, and vaginal dilators, which aim to strengthen pelvic floor muscles and enhance the contractility of the urethral, vaginal, and anal sphincters, thereby improving incontinence symptoms. The second type consists of aids that mechanically block the outlet, such as pessaries, urethral plugs, incontinence pads, incontinence pants, anal plugs, and vaginal bowel control systems, which directly or indirectly prevent incontinence leakage. The third type includes aids that assist in outlet drainage, such as catheters and anal excreta collection devices, which help patients effectively expel urine, feces, and other waste materials, preventing incontinence leakage. By summarizing the existing pelvic floor rehabilitation aids, personalized guidance can be provided to patients with PFD, helping them select the appropriate aids for their rehabilitation needs.
盆底功能障碍是一种常见的临床问题，可引起膀胱和肠道功能障碍(如尿失禁、尿潴留、粪失禁等)、盆腔器官脱垂、性功能障碍等症状。盆底康复辅助器具是盆底功能障碍治疗中的重要工具。然而，目前对于盆底功能障碍辅助器具疗效和作用机制的了解尚有限，且针对不同类型的盆底功能障碍如何选用合适的辅助器具缺乏规范性。为帮助盆底功能障碍患者个性化地选择适合的盆底康复辅助器具，有必要对现有辅助器具的种类、作用机制和应用情况进行总结。根据盆底康复辅助器具的作用机制和目标功能，可以将其主要分为3类：第1类是改善盆底功能的辅助器具，如阴道哑铃、阴道卫生棉条和阴道扩张器，旨在增强盆底肌肉力量，改善尿道括约肌、阴道括约肌和肛门括约肌的收缩能力，从而改善失禁症状；第2类是阻塞机械出口的辅助器具，如子宫托、尿道栓、失禁垫、失禁裤、肛门塞和阴道肠道控制系统，直接或间接防止失禁渗漏；第3类是出口引流的辅助器具，如导尿管和肛门排泄物收集装置，协助患者有效导出尿液、粪便等废物，预防失禁渗漏。通过对现有盆底康复辅助器具的总结，可以为盆底功能障碍患者提供个性化的指导，并帮助其选择适合的盆底康复辅助器具。.

OBJECTIVE: Pessary self-management offers benefits to women with no increased risk of complications. However, many are unwilling to self-manage, preferring clinician-led care. This study is aimed at exploring factors associated with willingness to self-manage a pessary.
METHODS: Women attending pessary clinic at a UK hospital were asked to complete a questionnaire providing responses on pessary use, comorbidities, female genital self-image, self-management experience and willingness (or not) to learn self-management. Based upon statistical advice we aimed to recruit 90 women. Data were analysed using the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test and Chi-squared test. Free text data were analysed thematically.
RESULTS: A total of 89 women completed the questionnaire. Thirty-three women (38%) had previously been taught pessary self-management. Of the remaining women, 12 (21%) were willing to learn, 28 (50%) were not willing and 16 (29%) were unsure. There was no correlation between female genital self-image and willingness to self-manage a pessary. Younger women were more willing to learn self-management (p =  < 0.001). Willing women were motivated by reduced follow-up visits. Self-managing women reported benefits including increased autonomy, cleanliness and giving their body \"a break\". Reasons discouraging women from self-managing were a lack of confidence; feeling physically unable; wanting clinician-led care; fear of problems or previous problems with their pessary.
CONCLUSIONS: Most women were either unsure about pessary self-management or unwilling to self-manage. Age was the only factor we found that had a significant relationship with willingness to self-manage a pessary. With robust self-management teaching, support and follow-up, it is likely that many of the barriers women report can be overcome.

There are a wide variety of gynecologic devices encountered on pelvic imaging which may not be the focus or primary reason for imaging. Such devices include pessaries, menstrual products, radiation therapy devices, tubal occlusion devices, and contraceptive devices, including intrauterine devices and intravaginal rings. This manuscript offers a comprehensive review of multimodality imaging appearances of gynecologic devices encountered on pelvic imaging and discusses device indications, positioning, and complications.

UNASSIGNED: Pelvic organ prolapse is common, causes unpleasant symptoms and negatively affects women\'s quality of life. In the UK, most women with pelvic organ prolapse attend clinics for pessary care.
UNASSIGNED: To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of vaginal pessary self-management on prolapse-specific quality of life for women with prolapse compared with clinic-based care; and to assess intervention acceptability and contextual influences on effectiveness, adherence and fidelity.
UNASSIGNED: A multicentre, parallel-group, superiority randomised controlled trial with a mixed-methods process evaluation.
UNASSIGNED: Women attending UK NHS outpatient pessary services, aged ≥ 18 years, using a pessary of any type/material (except shelf, Gellhorn or Cube) for at least 2 weeks. Exclusions: women with limited manual dexterity, with cognitive deficit (prohibiting consent or self-management), pregnant or non-English-speaking.
UNASSIGNED: The self-management intervention involved a 30-minute teaching appointment, an information leaflet, a 2-week follow-up telephone call and a local clinic telephone helpline number. Clinic-based care involved routine appointments determined by centres\' usual practice.
UNASSIGNED: Remote web-based application; minimisation was by age, pessary user type and centre.
UNASSIGNED: Participants, those delivering the intervention and researchers were not blinded to group allocation.
UNASSIGNED: The patient-reported primary outcome (measured using the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7) was prolapse-specific quality of life, and the cost-effectiveness outcome was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (a specifically developed health Resource Use Questionnaire was used) at 18 months post randomisation. Secondary outcome measures included self-efficacy and complications. Process evaluation data were collected by interview, audio-recording and checklist. Analysis was by intention to treat.
UNASSIGNED: Three hundred and forty women were randomised (self-management, n = 169; clinic-based care, n = 171). At 18 months post randomisation, 291 questionnaires with valid primary outcome data were available (self-management, n = 139; clinic-based care, n = 152). Baseline economic analysis was based on 264 participants (self-management, n = 125; clinic-based care, n = 139) with valid quality of life and resource use data. Self-management was an acceptable intervention. There was no group difference in prolapse-specific quality of life at 18 months (adjusted mean difference -0.03, 95% confidence interval -9.32 to 9.25). There was fidelity to intervention delivery. Self-management was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, with an estimated incremental net benefit of £564.32 and an 80.81% probability of cost-effectiveness. At 18 months, more pessary complications were reported in the clinic-based care group (adjusted mean difference 3.83, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 6.86). There was no group difference in general self-efficacy, but self-managing women were more confident in pessary self-management activities. In both groups, contextual factors impacted on adherence and effectiveness. There were no reported serious unexpected serious adverse reactions. There were 32 serious adverse events (self-management, n = 17; clinic-based care, n = 14), all unrelated to the intervention. Skew in the baseline data for the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7, the influence of the global COVID-19 pandemic, the potential effects of crossover and the lack of ethnic diversity in the recruited sample were possible limitations.
UNASSIGNED: Self-management was acceptable and cost-effective, led to fewer complications and did not improve or worsen quality of life for women with prolapse compared with clinic-based care. Future research is needed to develop a quality-of-life measure that is sensitive to the changes women desire from treatment.
UNASSIGNED: This study is registered as ISRCTN62510577.
UNASSIGNED: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 16/82/01) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 23. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Pelvic organ prolapse is a common and distressing condition experienced by large numbers of women. Prolapse is when the organs that are usually in the pelvis drop down into the vagina. Women experience a feeling of something coming down into the vagina, along with bowel, bladder and sexual problems. One possible treatment is a vaginal pessary. The pessary is a device that is inserted into the vagina and holds the pelvic organs back in their usual place. Women who use a vaginal pessary usually come back to clinic every 6 months to have their pessary removed and replaced; this is called clinic-based care. However, it is possible for a woman to look after the pessary herself; this is called self-management. This study compared self-management with clinic-based care. Three hundred and forty women with prolapse took part; 171 received clinic-based care and 169 undertook self-management. Each woman had an equal chance of being in either group. Women in the self-management group received a 30-minute teaching appointment, an information leaflet, a 2-week follow-up telephone call and a telephone number for their local centre. Women in the clinic-based care group returned to clinic as advised by the treating healthcare professional. Self-management was found to be acceptable. Women self-managed their pessary in ways that suited their lifestyle. After 18 months, there was no difference between the groups in women’s quality of life. Women in the self-management group experienced fewer pessary complications than women who received clinic-based care. Self-management costs less to deliver than clinic-based care. In summary, self-management did not improve women’s quality of life more than clinic-based care, but it did lead to women experiencing fewer complications and cost less to deliver in the NHS. The findings support self-management as a treatment pathway for women using a pessary for prolapse.