Abstract:Matteo Frigerio, 1 Andrea Morciano, 2 Marta Barba, 1 Michele Carlo Schiavi, 3 Alice Cola, 1 Elena Cavaliere, 4 Carlo Rappa, 5 Mauro Cervigni 6 On behalf of the "Young Commission" of the Italian Association of Urological Gynecology and Pelvic Floor (AIUG) 1 Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo dei Tintori, Monza, Italy; 2 Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Panico Pelvic Floor Center, Pia Fondazione "Cardinale G. Panico", Tricase, Italy; 3 Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, "Sandro Pertini" Hospital, Roma, Italy; 4 Department of Gynecology and Obstetric B, Ospedale Della Donna E Del Bambino, Verona, Italy; 5 Centro PelviCare "Clinica Villa Angela", Napoli, Italy; 6 Department of Urology, Università "la Sapienza", ICOT, Latina, Italy Correspondence: Marta Barba, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo dei Tintori, via G.B. Pergolesi, 33, Monza, 20900, Italy, Tel +0392339434, Email Purpose: Surgical repair is considered the mainstay of genital prolapse management. Several procedures are available both by vaginal and abdominal route, with and without mesh augmentation. The Italian UroGynecology Association (AIUG) promoted this survey with the aim of evaluating current variations in the surgical management of various types of prolapse in different clinical settings and to compare practice amongst practitioners working in high- and medium/low-volume centers. Participants and Methods: The questionnaire examined four contentious areas of contemporary prolapse management. The questionnaire was emailed to the AIUG gynecologist members in Italy in 2023. Results: A total of 104 complete responses were received, resulting in a 6.9% response rate. Native-tissue repair represents the preferred option in most scenarios and was proposed by 76%, 68.3%, 94.2%, and 52.9% of practitioners in the case of primary anterior, uterovaginal, posterior, and vault prolapse respectively. The use of vaginal mesh in these scenarios is very limited. Native tissue repairs in case of recurrent anterior, posterior, or apical recurrent prolapse would be performed only by 37.5%, 47.1%, and 28% of surgeons respectively. In these cases, the use of mesh - by vaginal and abdominal route - increased significantly. Conclusion: This survey showed that in Italy surgical management of genital prolapse is very heterogeneous. Native-tissue repair remains the preferred option, but practitioners tend to lose confidence in mesh-free procedures in case of prolapse recurrence. Despite mesh kits recalls and recommendations, the use of transvaginal implants is still considered an option for prolapse repair. Keywords: pelvic floor, pelvic organ prolapse, survey, surgery, management, urogynecology Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a condition related to the descent of the uterus, bladder, rectum, and/or bowel through the vagina. It is a worldwide public health issue and one of the most frequent findings in patients seeking care for pelvic floor symptoms. 1 Factors associated with POP development and recurrence involve vaginal delivery, chronic increased abdominal pressure, altered collagenic patterns, and previous pelvic floor surgery. 2–4 Prolapse may be asymptomatic - especially in early stages - or associated with bladder, bowel, and sexual dysfunctions. 5 Management includes both conservative and surgical options according to POP severity, associated symptoms, and the patient's general health and wishes. 6 However, surgical repair is considered the mainstay of genital prolapse management, and it is recommended in case of conservative management fails. Several procedures are available to achieve prolapse repair both by vaginal and abdominal route, with and without mesh augmentation. 7,8 This involves widespread variations in practice in the conservative and surgical management of prolapse in Italy. For example, a retrospective cohort study focused on variation in surgical procedures for POP among Tuscan health districts and on hospital care quality in terms of reoperations, complications and length of stay. The authors found that patients and clinicians' preference may be the main determinants of regional variation. For instance, patients could choose to be operated in a hospital offering surgical services which are perceived to be of higher quality, like minimally invasive interventions. 9 Moreover, trends are changing worldwide in light of the recent publications on vaginal mesh usage and the introduction of laparoscopic and uterine-sparing procedures. 10–12 Moreover, there is a renewed interest in native-tissue techniques involving ligamentous or muscular structures due to lowe -Abstract Truncated-

Determinants of womens preferences for surgical versus conservative management for pelvic organ prolapse: a survey-based study from Italy

Factors affecting women’s decision between uterine-preserving versus hysterectomy-based surgery for pelvic organ prolapse

Prolapse surgery versus vaginal pessary in women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse: which factors influence the choice of treatment?

Association of Neighborhood-Level Socioeconomic Status With Prolapse Management Decision

National Survey on the Management of Genital Prolapse in Italy

Impact on Sexual Function and Wish for Subsequent Pregnancy after Uterus-Preserving Prolapse Surgery in Premenopausal Women

Factors affecting patient choice for continued observation versus intervention for pelvic organ prolapse

[Factors Influencing Therapy Decision in Patients with Severe Pelvic Organ Prolapse].

Minority Women Undergo Surgical Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse at Similar Rates to Non-minorities in a Hispanic Minority-majority Population: An Analysis of Nearly 1000 Women

Pessary or surgery for a symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse: the PEOPLE study, a multicentre prospective cohort study

Symptoms, quality of life, and factors affecting women’s treatment decisions regarding pelvic organ prolapse

Pelvic organ prolapse: Women's experiences of Accessing Care & Recommendations for improvement

Clinician perspectives on hysterectomy versus uterine preservation in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Willingness of postmenopausal women to participate in a study involving local vaginal oestrogen treatment as an adjunct to pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a qualitative study

Exploring nulliparous women's perceptions of pelvic organ prolapse treatments: A qualitative study for enhancing nursing care in Romania

Association between delivery mode and pelvic organ prolapse: A meta-analysis of observational studies.

Recurrent pelvic prolapse after pelvic organ prolapse suspension (POPS): Analysis and treatment of an emerging clinical issue

Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery.

Cost-effectiveness of pessary therapy versus surgery for symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse: an economic evaluation alongside a randomised non-inferiority controlled trial

Do Italian women prefer cesarean section? Results from a survey on mode of delivery preferences

Rectocele: victim of availability bias? Results of a Belgian survey of colorectal and gynecological surgeons