Sexual and organ function in patients with symptomatic prolapse: are pessaries helpful?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate quality of life and pelvic organ and sexual function before and during pessary use in patients with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse and to determine reasons which lead to cessation of pessary use. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENT(S): Patients with symptomatic stage II or more prolapse of the anterior, posterior, or apical vaginal wall with or without uterus were included in this study. INTERVENTION(S): We used the Female Sexual Function Index questionnaire and the Sheffield prolapse questionnaire. For quality of life we used the King's Health Questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Main outcome measures were quality of life and sexual and pelvic organ function. RESULT(S): A total of 73 women participated in this study; 31 were sexually active. Desire, lubrication, and sexual satisfaction showed statistically significant improvement, and orgasm remained unchanged. Statistically significant improvement in the feeling of bulge occurred during therapy, stool outlet problems were significantly improved, overactive bladder symptoms were significantly better, and pessaries did not significantly alter incontinence. CONCLUSION(S): Pessaries have been shown to be a viable noninvasive treatment for pelvic organ prolapse improving organ and sexual function as well as general wellbeing.

Life-threatening versus non-life-threatening manual strangulation: are there appropriate criteria for MR imaging of the neck?

The aim of the study was to determine objective radiological signs of danger to life in survivors of manual strangulation and to establish a radiological scoring system for the differentiation between life-threatening and non-life-threatening strangulation by dividing the cross section of the neck into three zones (superficial, middle and deep zone). Forensic pathologists classified 56 survivors of strangulation into life-threatening and non-life-threatening cases by history and clinical examination alone, and two blinded radiologists evaluated the MRIs of the neck. In 15 cases, strangulation was life-threatening (27%), compared with 41 cases in which strangulation was non-life-threatening (73%). The best radiological signs on MRI to differentiate between the two groups were intramuscular haemorrhage/oedema, swelling of platysma and intracutaneous bleeding (all p = 0.02) followed by subcutaneous bleeding (p = 0.034) and haemorrhagic lymph nodes (p = 0.04), all indicating life-threatening strangulation. The radiological scoring system showed a sensitivity and specificity of approximately 70% for life-threatening strangulation, when at least two neck zones were affected. MRI is not only helpful in assessing the severity of strangulation, but is also an excellent documentation tool that is even admissible in court.