In the management of a 60-year-old woman presenting with a third-degree uterine prolapse, the most appropriate surgical intervention is a vaginal hysterectomy accompanied by pelvic floor repair. This approach is chosen for several reasons:
- Comprehensive Addressal: A third-degree uterine prolapse involves the protrusion of all vaginal walls, and often the cervix, outside the vaginal orifice. Vaginal hysterectomy effectively removes the uterus, addressing the prolapse directly.
- Pelvic Floor Repair: By combining the hysterectomy with pelvic floor repair, any weakness or defects in the pelvic support structures are corrected, thereby reducing the risk of recurrence and improving long-term outcomes.
- Suitability for Age: Given the patient's age of 60, fertility preservation is not a concern, making hysterectomy a viable option.
Alternative options:
- Pelvic Floor Repair Alone: This may not adequately address the severity of a complete prolapse since the uterus remains in place, only addressing the supporting structures.
- Sacrospinous Fixation: Typically used for vaginal vault prolapse post-hysterectomy, not ideal for treating complete uterine prolapse without preceding hysterectomy.
- Pessary: A non-surgical option suitable for patients unable to undergo surgery due to medical comorbidities or preference, but not a definitive solution for someone capable of tolerating surgery.
Therefore, the definitive management for a robust outcome in this scenario is a vaginal hysterectomy with pelvic floor repair.