EVeRLAST 2-Year Follow-Up

Activity recommendations and lifting restrictions after gynecologic surgery are based on tradition and anecdote. Despite the paucity of evidence to support such recommendations, in a recent survey, 82-86% of minimally invasive gynecologic surgeons recommended postoperative lifting restrictions. Meanwhile, other surgical specialties have begun to depart from these traditional restrictions, recognizing not only the unclear health benefits of a prolonged convalescence, but the economic implications of arbitrarily restricting postoperative labor force participation. For example, following inguinal hernia repair, patients who were able to decide when to return to work took a significantly shorter period of sick leave and hernia recurrence was not found to be higher in those resuming activities the day after surgery.

With respect to prolapse surgery, recommendations related to weight restrictions are primarily based upon theoretical avoidance of intra-abdominal pressure which could compromise the success of a recent reconstructive pelvic floor surgery. However, in a research study of healthy volunteers, daily physiologic events such as Valsalva, coughing, and rising from supine to upright positions generated considerably more intra-abdominal pressure than lifting. In animal studies, mechanical stimulation improves skeletal muscle healing by promoting remodeling, myoblast chemotaxis, and differentiation.6 Thus studies have challenged the notion that avoidance of weight-bearing activities is protective to the reconstructed pelvic floor.

In a recent randomized controlled trial of restrictive versus liberal activity recommendations following prolapse surgery, liberal activity recommendations were associated with similar patient satisfaction yet no differences in short-term anatomic outcomes. While this study added important evidence, it was not powered to detect differences in early anatomic prolapse recurrence, and the literature remains inconclusive regarding the risks (or absence thereof) of recommending liberal resumption of activities following prolapse surgery.

Therefore, the objective of the EVeRLAST study is to conclusively determine whether expedited resumption of postoperative activity levels is non-inferior to standard activity restrictions with respect to anatomic and functional outcomes. We recently presented short-term outcome data, collected three months after surgery, which confirmed that expedited activity is non-inferior to standard activity limitations. We now propose to further follow this study population, with repeat assessments two years after surgery. We hypothesize that those who received expedited postoperative activity instructions will continue to demonstrate non-inferior anatomic and symptomatic outcomes two years after prolapse surgery. We will test this hypothesis by completing the following specific aims.

The follow-up will be conducted remotely via Zoom interviews.

Specific Aim 1: Determine if expedited resumption of postoperative activity levels results in non-inferior symptomatic outcomes when compared to standard activity restrictions at two years after the original surgery.

Specific Aim 2: Compare objective and subjective measures of physical function two years after surgery between those receiving expedited versus standard activity restrictions. Measures include a 2-minute walk test (2MWT), chair stand test, and the Activities Assessment Scale (AAS).

Specific Aim 3: Compare objective and subjective measures of and pelvic floor function two years after surgery in those receiving expedited versus standard activity restrictions. Main outcomes include retreatment (e.g., pessary, surgery), objective anatomic POPQ data, where available, the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI) and impression of improvement using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement scale (PGI-I).