International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2016
Transvaginal treatment of anterior or central urogenital prolapse using six tension-free straps and light mesh.
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.
Guyomard Aurélie, Delorme Emmanuel
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, complications, and outcomes of treatment of anterior or central compartment urogenital prolapse by placement of an anteroposterior 22-g/m(2) mesh with six straps through one anterior vaginal incision.
METHODS: In a prospective study, patients treated for urogenital prolapse at a center in France between February 2008 and June 2011 were enrolled. Previous treatments, related interventions, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and anatomic outcomes were recorded during 3years of follow-up. Failure was defined as recurrence of prolapse of stage II or higher according to the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system.
RESULTS: Overall, 74 patients were included. Preoperatively, 55 (74%) patients had stage III cystocele, 13 (18%) had stage IV cystocele, and 44 (59%) had associated uterine prolapse of at least stage II. Postoperative hematoma occurred in three patients and vaginal exposure in two patients. There were no cases of visceral injury. Vaginal comfort improved postoperatively: 68 (92%) patients were satisfied with the outcome and there were no cases of de novo dyspareunia. Seventeen (23%) patients subsequently had stress urinary incontinence that was treated by placement of suburethral tape. The anatomic outcomes were satisfactory for 72 (97%) women, including sexually active patients.
CONCLUSION: Transvaginal prolapse repair by placement of an anteroposterior six-strap 22-g/m(2) mesh was feasible and effective with satisfactory 3-year outcomes.
METHODS: In a prospective study, patients treated for urogenital prolapse at a center in France between February 2008 and June 2011 were enrolled. Previous treatments, related interventions, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and anatomic outcomes were recorded during 3years of follow-up. Failure was defined as recurrence of prolapse of stage II or higher according to the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system.
RESULTS: Overall, 74 patients were included. Preoperatively, 55 (74%) patients had stage III cystocele, 13 (18%) had stage IV cystocele, and 44 (59%) had associated uterine prolapse of at least stage II. Postoperative hematoma occurred in three patients and vaginal exposure in two patients. There were no cases of visceral injury. Vaginal comfort improved postoperatively: 68 (92%) patients were satisfied with the outcome and there were no cases of de novo dyspareunia. Seventeen (23%) patients subsequently had stress urinary incontinence that was treated by placement of suburethral tape. The anatomic outcomes were satisfactory for 72 (97%) women, including sexually active patients.
CONCLUSION: Transvaginal prolapse repair by placement of an anteroposterior six-strap 22-g/m(2) mesh was feasible and effective with satisfactory 3-year outcomes.