Taiwanese journal of obstetrics & gynecology · 2015
Pelvic reconstruction improves pelvic floor strength in pelvic organ prolapse patients.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Guan Zhong, Li Huai-Fang, Yang Xiang, Guo Li-Li
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate pelvic floor muscle strength after the modified pelvic reconstruction procedure for pelvic organ prolapse (POP).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were assigned to two groups consisting of 37 patients diagnosed with POP and undergoing modified pelvic reconstruction (reconstruction group), and 30 patients admitted to our hospital during the same period for other surgical indications (control group). Vaginal palpation of pelvic floor muscle strength was performed according to the modified Oxford grading system before operating on the two groups and again in the 3(rd) month following surgery for the reconstruction group. A comparative study was performed to evaluate the differences between the two groups and the improvement of pelvic floor muscle strength in the reconstruction group.
RESULTS: The pelvic floor muscle strength was significantly improved postoperatively when compared with preoperative results in the reconstruction group (t = -17.478, p < 0.001). However, pre- and postoperative muscle strength in the reconstruction group was significantly lower relative to the control group, respectively (χ(2) = 63.293, p < 0.001; χ(2) = 31.550, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The modified pelvic reconstruction procedure could improve pelvic floor muscle strength in POP patients, which remains lower when compared with the normal population. Pelvic floor muscle strength should be included in the assessment of surgical outcomes in POP.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were assigned to two groups consisting of 37 patients diagnosed with POP and undergoing modified pelvic reconstruction (reconstruction group), and 30 patients admitted to our hospital during the same period for other surgical indications (control group). Vaginal palpation of pelvic floor muscle strength was performed according to the modified Oxford grading system before operating on the two groups and again in the 3(rd) month following surgery for the reconstruction group. A comparative study was performed to evaluate the differences between the two groups and the improvement of pelvic floor muscle strength in the reconstruction group.
RESULTS: The pelvic floor muscle strength was significantly improved postoperatively when compared with preoperative results in the reconstruction group (t = -17.478, p < 0.001). However, pre- and postoperative muscle strength in the reconstruction group was significantly lower relative to the control group, respectively (χ(2) = 63.293, p < 0.001; χ(2) = 31.550, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The modified pelvic reconstruction procedure could improve pelvic floor muscle strength in POP patients, which remains lower when compared with the normal population. Pelvic floor muscle strength should be included in the assessment of surgical outcomes in POP.