Ginekologia polska · 2016
Prosthetic materials for treating posterior vaginal wall prolapse and rectocele - own experience.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Stadnik Honorata, Kościński Tomasz Maciej
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This report describes results of posterior vaginal wall prolapse and rectocele treatment performing tension free reconstruction method with polypropylene mesh implantation.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In years 2001 to 20015, 71 female patients in age of 42-82 years were surgically treated. Besides difficult emptying they complained of feeling of heaviness in the pelvis (38%) and dyspareunia (16.9%). Defecography and magnetic resonance proved the presence of rectocele in 84.5%, enterocele in 38%, descending perineum in 28.2%, genital organ prolapse in 23.9%, and rectal prolapse in 22.5% cases. 37 patients with defects of low location have undergone implantation of prosthetic material from vaginal approach. In cases of high location and genital organ prolapse abdominal approach was done.
RESULTS: Permanent reconstruction of the rectovaginal septum has been achieved in 70 patients (98%). Symptoms of dyschesia, pelvic plain, heavy straining were persisted in 4 patients (10.3%). 3 cases of mash erosions were diagnosed. One patient was reoperated. Among 6 other patients who needed futher surgical treatment only one was reoperated because of vaginal prolapse. 81.7% of patients was satisfied with their treatment.
CONCLUSION: Using prosthetic materials in pelvic floor defects treatment is characterized by high efficacy and low complication percentage.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In years 2001 to 20015, 71 female patients in age of 42-82 years were surgically treated. Besides difficult emptying they complained of feeling of heaviness in the pelvis (38%) and dyspareunia (16.9%). Defecography and magnetic resonance proved the presence of rectocele in 84.5%, enterocele in 38%, descending perineum in 28.2%, genital organ prolapse in 23.9%, and rectal prolapse in 22.5% cases. 37 patients with defects of low location have undergone implantation of prosthetic material from vaginal approach. In cases of high location and genital organ prolapse abdominal approach was done.
RESULTS: Permanent reconstruction of the rectovaginal septum has been achieved in 70 patients (98%). Symptoms of dyschesia, pelvic plain, heavy straining were persisted in 4 patients (10.3%). 3 cases of mash erosions were diagnosed. One patient was reoperated. Among 6 other patients who needed futher surgical treatment only one was reoperated because of vaginal prolapse. 81.7% of patients was satisfied with their treatment.
CONCLUSION: Using prosthetic materials in pelvic floor defects treatment is characterized by high efficacy and low complication percentage.