Diseases of the colon and rectum · 1999
Treatment of enterocele by obliteration of the pelvic inlet.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Gosselink M J, van Dam J H, Huisman W M, Ginai A Z, Schouten W R
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Enterocele is defined as a herniation of the peritoneal sac between the vagina and the rectum. This hernial sac contains either sigmoid colon or small bowel. It is well known that enteroceles are associated with symptoms of pelvic discomfort. It is unclear whether enteroceles contribute to evacuation difficulties. Controversies also exist regarding their treatment of choice. The aim of the present prospective study was to evaluate the impact of obliteration of the pelvic inlet on evacuation difficulties and on symptoms of pelvic discomfort.
METHODS: From October 1994 to August 1996 20 females (median age, 53; range, 41-73 years) with symptomatic enterocele diagnosed on evacuation proctography underwent obliteration of the pelvic inlet with a nonabsorbable Mersilene mesh. All patients presented with pelvic discomfort, characterized by feelings of prolapse (n=20), pelvic pressure (n=16), lower abdominal pain (n=13), and false urge to defecate (n=15). Symptoms of obstructed defecation were noted in 15 patients. Six months after repair, evacuation proctography with opacification of the small bowel and the vagina was repeated.
RESULTS: The median duration of follow-up was 25 (range, 10-34) months. A persistent or recurrent enterocele was observed in none of the patients. All symptoms of pelvic discomfort disappeared except feelings of a false urge to defecate, which persisted in 27 percent of cases. Symptoms of obstructed defecation persisted in all patients with evacuation difficulties.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with pelvic discomfort enterocele should be considered as a possible causative factor. It is unlikely that this abnormality contributes to the problem of obstructed defecation. In patients with a symptomatic enterocele, obliteration of the pelvic inlet with a Mersilene mesh is an adequate treatment.
METHODS: From October 1994 to August 1996 20 females (median age, 53; range, 41-73 years) with symptomatic enterocele diagnosed on evacuation proctography underwent obliteration of the pelvic inlet with a nonabsorbable Mersilene mesh. All patients presented with pelvic discomfort, characterized by feelings of prolapse (n=20), pelvic pressure (n=16), lower abdominal pain (n=13), and false urge to defecate (n=15). Symptoms of obstructed defecation were noted in 15 patients. Six months after repair, evacuation proctography with opacification of the small bowel and the vagina was repeated.
RESULTS: The median duration of follow-up was 25 (range, 10-34) months. A persistent or recurrent enterocele was observed in none of the patients. All symptoms of pelvic discomfort disappeared except feelings of a false urge to defecate, which persisted in 27 percent of cases. Symptoms of obstructed defecation persisted in all patients with evacuation difficulties.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with pelvic discomfort enterocele should be considered as a possible causative factor. It is unlikely that this abnormality contributes to the problem of obstructed defecation. In patients with a symptomatic enterocele, obliteration of the pelvic inlet with a Mersilene mesh is an adequate treatment.