MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1007/s00192-011-1648-0

Медицинская библиотека · International urogynecology journal · 2012

Use of preoperative prolapse reduction stress testing and the risk of a second surgery for urinary symptoms following laparoscopic sacral colpoperineopexy.

Park Jean, McDermott Colleen D, Terry Colin L, Bump Richard C, Woodman Patrick J, Hale Douglass S

СтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to determine the reoperation rate for sling placement or revision in patients who had primary continence procedures based on prolapse reduction stress testing (RST) prior to laparoscopic sacral colpoperineopexy (LSCP).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of women who had RST prior to LSCP for symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse. Patients with positive test (Pos RST) had a concomitant midurethral sling procedure and those with negative test (Neg RST) did not. Variables were compared with either Student's t test or Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

In Neg RST group (n = 70), the rate of surgery for de novo urodynamic stress incontinence was 18.6%. In Pos RST group (n = 82), the rate of sling revision for bladder outlet obstruction was 7.3%. Overall, 88% of patients did not require a second surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of RST to recommend concomitant continence procedures during LSCP results in a single surgery for the majority of our patients.

Для цитирования: Park Jean, McDermott Colleen D, Terry Colin L, Bump Richard C, Woodman Patrick J, Hale Douglass S. Use of preoperative prolapse reduction stress testing and the risk of a second surgery for urinary symptoms following laparoscopic sacral colpoperineopexy.. International urogynecology journal. 2012. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-011-1648-0.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.