Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 8, 2026
Anogenital Distance and Perineal Measurements of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse POP Quantification System
Published on: September 20, 2018
Assessment of Peri- and Postoperative Outcomes Following Apical Prolapse Repair in Octogenarians: A Retrospective
Alireza Hadizadeh1, Henry H Chill2, Angela Leffelman3
1Division of Urogynecology, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, NorthShore University HealthSystem (Drs. Hadizadeh, Chill, Leffelman, Paya-Ten, Chang, Goldberg, and Rostaminia), Skokie, Illinois; NorthShore University HealthSystem Research Institute (Drs. Hadizadeh and Lee), Evanston, Illinois.
Insights
Octogenarians undergoing apical prolapse repair experienced similar postoperative complication rates and healthcare encounters compared to younger patients. Age is not a barrier to this surgery, but individualized risk assessment is key.
Area of Science:
- Urogynecology
- Geriatric Surgery
- Pelvic Floor Disorders
Background:
- Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) affects a significant number of women, with increasing incidence in older populations.
- Surgical repair of apical prolapse is a common procedure, but data on outcomes in octogenarians are limited.
- Assessing surgical risk in elderly patients is crucial for informed decision-making.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the risk of postoperative complications and unplanned healthcare encounters after apical prolapse repair in octogenarians versus younger patients.
- To evaluate the safety and feasibility of apical prolapse repair in patients aged 80 years and older.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective cohort study including 481 patients who underwent apical prolapse repair (2009-2024).
- Cohort divided into octogenarians (≥80 years) and a younger cohort (18-79 years).
- Exclusion criteria included obliterative procedures and missing 30-day postoperative complication data.
Main Results:
- Octogenarians had a higher burden of comorbidities (e.g., hypertension, deep vein thrombosis history).
- Overall 30-day postoperative complication frequency was similar between octogenarians (7.4%) and younger patients (7.6%).
- No significant difference in unanticipated healthcare encounters was observed between the groups.
Conclusions:
- Apical prolapse repair is safe and feasible in octogenarians, with outcomes comparable to younger patients.
- Chronological age alone should not be a contraindication for surgical intervention in this demographic.
- Individualized preoperative risk assessment remains essential for optimizing patient selection and outcomes.
Objective:
To assess the risk of postoperative complications and unanticipated healthcare encounters in octogenarians compared to younger patients following apical prolapse repair.
Design:
Retrospective cohort study.
Setting:
University-affiliated academic tertiary hospital center.
Interventions:
Surgery for pelvic organ prolapse.
Patients:
Patients who underwent apical prolapse repair between 2009 and 2024. The cohort was divided into two groups: 1) Patients over the age of 80 (octogenarians); 2) patients aged 18 to 79 (younger cohort). Patients who underwent obliterative procedures or had missing complication data within 30 days postsurgery were excluded.
Measurements And Main Results:
A total of 481 patients were analyzed, including 136 octogenarians and 355 younger patients. Postoperative complications within 30 days were the primary outcome, while secondary outcomes included unanticipated healthcare encounters such as emergency department visits, clinic visits, and readmissions. Octogenarians had significantly higher frequency of comorbidities, such as hypertension (61.5% vs 28.1%, p < .001) and a history of deep vein thrombosis (6.7% vs 1.7%, p < .001), compared to younger patients. However, overall complication frequency within 30 days did not differ significantly between groups (7.4% vs 7.6%, p = .934). Specific complications varied, with octogenarians experiencing higher frequency of postoperative urinary retention (5.2% vs 0%, p < .001), and younger patients showing a higher likelihood of urinary tract infections (5.9% vs 0.7%, p = .013). Multivariate analysis identified prior abdominal surgery (OR: 2.20, 95% CI: 1.05-4.57, p = .036) and undergoing anterior repair (OR: 3.36, 95% CI: 1.27-8.89, p = .015) as predictors of complications within 30 days. No significant differences were observed in unanticipated healthcare encounters between groups.
Conclusion:
Apical prolapse repair in octogenarians is safe and feasible, with similar complication frequencies and healthcare encounters compared to younger patients. These findings suggest that age alone should not preclude surgical intervention in this population, though individualized risk assessment remains crucial.
