BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2015
A 3-year follow-up after anterior colporrhaphy compared with collagen-coated transvaginal mesh for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomised controlled trial.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка 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.
Rudnicki M, Laurikainen E, Pogosean R, Kinne I, Jakobsson U, Teleman P
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the 1-year (previously published) and 3-year objective and subjective cure rates, and complications, related to the use of a collagen-coated transvaginal mesh for anterior vaginal wall prolapse against a conventional anterior repair.
DESIGN: Randomised controlled study.
SETTING: Six departments of obstetrics and gynaecology in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark.
POPULATION: A total of 138 women, of 55 years of age or older, admitted for stage ≥2 anterior vaginal wall prolapse.
METHODS: The women scheduled for primary anterior vaginal wall prolapse surgery were randomised between conventional anterior colporrhaphy and surgery with a collagen-coated prolene mesh. All patients were evaluated using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) assessment before and after surgery. Symptoms related to pelvic organ prolapse were evaluated using the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) and the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Objective cure, defined as POP-Q stage <2 prolapse at the 1- and 3-year follow-ups. Furthermore, mesh exposure and dyspareunia were also recorded.
RESULTS: In total, 138 patients (70 from the mesh group versus 68 from the conventional anterior colporrhaphy group) out of 160 (86.3%) participated in the 3-year follow-up. POP-Q revealed an objective anatomic cure for 88.1 and 91.4%, respectively, in the mesh group at the 1- and 3-year follow-ups, compared with 39.9 and 41.2% in the colporrhaphy group. No difference between the groups was observed regarding PFIQ-7, PFDI-20, and Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12) scores. The number of mesh exposures did not change during the study period and all exposures were minor.
CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that although the objective outcome was superior in the mesh group, the use of mesh had no impact on the subjective outcome.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: POP-Q deteriorates after anterior prolapse surgery but remains stable in women with mesh implantation.
DESIGN: Randomised controlled study.
SETTING: Six departments of obstetrics and gynaecology in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark.
POPULATION: A total of 138 women, of 55 years of age or older, admitted for stage ≥2 anterior vaginal wall prolapse.
METHODS: The women scheduled for primary anterior vaginal wall prolapse surgery were randomised between conventional anterior colporrhaphy and surgery with a collagen-coated prolene mesh. All patients were evaluated using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) assessment before and after surgery. Symptoms related to pelvic organ prolapse were evaluated using the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) and the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Objective cure, defined as POP-Q stage <2 prolapse at the 1- and 3-year follow-ups. Furthermore, mesh exposure and dyspareunia were also recorded.
RESULTS: In total, 138 patients (70 from the mesh group versus 68 from the conventional anterior colporrhaphy group) out of 160 (86.3%) participated in the 3-year follow-up. POP-Q revealed an objective anatomic cure for 88.1 and 91.4%, respectively, in the mesh group at the 1- and 3-year follow-ups, compared with 39.9 and 41.2% in the colporrhaphy group. No difference between the groups was observed regarding PFIQ-7, PFDI-20, and Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12) scores. The number of mesh exposures did not change during the study period and all exposures were minor.
CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that although the objective outcome was superior in the mesh group, the use of mesh had no impact on the subjective outcome.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: POP-Q deteriorates after anterior prolapse surgery but remains stable in women with mesh implantation.