Literature DB >> 11795640

Vaginal configuration on MRI after abdominal sacrocolpopexy and sacrospinous ligament suspension.

E H Sze1, J Meranus, N Kohli, J R Miklos, M M Karram.   

Abstract

An MRI study was conducted to compare the vaginal configuration of women who had undergone sacrospinous fixation with transvaginal needle suspension or abdominal sacrocolpopexy with retropubic colposuspension with that of normal controls. MRI examination demonstrated that in normal controls the lower vagina formed an acute angle (mean 53 degrees) with the pubococcygeal line and intersected the upper vagina at a mean angle of 145 degrees. In the abdominal repair group the lower vagina intersected the pubococcygeal line at a mean angle of 57 degrees and joined the upper segment at a mean angle of 137 degrees. In the vaginal repair group the lower vagina intersected the pubococcygeal line at a mean angle of 54 degrees and joined the upper segment at a mean angle of 220 degrees. Our study demonstrated that abdominal sacrocolpopexy with retropubic colposuspension more closely restored the vagina to its normal configuration, whereas sacrospinous fixation with transvaginal needle suspension creates an abnormal vaginal axis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11795640     DOI: 10.1007/s001920170016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct


  14 in total

1.  Translevator posterior intravaginal slingplasty: anatomical landmarks and safety margins.

Authors:  Stefan Smajda; Linda Vanormelingen; Giovanni Vandewalle; Willem Ombelet; Eric de Jonge; Piet Hinoul
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2005-01-27

2.  The effectiveness of the sacrospinous hysteropexy for the primary treatment of uterovaginal prolapse.

Authors:  Viviane Dietz; Joyce de Jong; Marieke Huisman; Steven Schraffordt Koops; Peter Heintz; Huub van der Vaart
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2007-03-24

3.  Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging before and 6 months after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.

Authors:  Robin M F van der Weiden; Elena Rociu; Guido H H Mannaerts; Marcel H A van Hooff; Mark E Vierhout; Mariella I J Withagen
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-10-22       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 4.  The current state and the future of robotic surgery in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery.

Authors:  Rachael D Sussman; Benoit Peyronnet; Benjamin M Brucker
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2019-09-01

5.  Bilateral sacrospinous fixation without hysterectomy: 18-month follow-up.

Authors:  Mehmet Baki Şentürk; Hakan Güraslan; Yusuf Çakmak; Murat Ekin
Journal:  J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc       Date:  2015-06-01

6.  Magnetic resonance imaging of abdominal versus vaginal prolapse surgery with mesh.

Authors:  Shimon Ginath; Alan D Garely; Jonathan S Luchs; Azin Shahryarinejad; Cedric K Olivera; Sue Zhou; Charles J Ascher-Walsh; Alexander Condrea; Michael L Brodman; Michael D Vardy
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-04-28       Impact factor: 2.894

7.  [Prolapse surgery. With abdominal or vaginal meshes?].

Authors:  H Loertzer; P Schneider; P Thelen; R H Ringert; A Strauß
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 8.  [Reconstructive pelvic surgery. Current status and future perspectives].

Authors:  J N Nyarangi-Dix; N Djakovic; M Kurosch; A Haferkamp; M Hohenfellner
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 0.639

9.  Quantitative analyses of variability in normal vaginal shape and dimension on MR images.

Authors:  Jiajia Luo; Cornelia Betschart; James A Ashton-Miller; John O L DeLancey
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-01-25       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 10.  Where to for pelvic organ prolapse treatment after the FDA pronouncements? A systematic review of the recent literature.

Authors:  J M van Geelen; P L Dwyer
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 2.894

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.