Literature DB >> 16394040

A three-year prospective assessment of rectocele repair using porcine xenograft.

Daniel Altman1, Jan Zetterström, Anders Mellgren, Catharina Gustafsson, Bo Anzén, Annika López.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively evaluate clinical outcome of rectocele repair using xenograft 3 years after surgery.
METHODS: Twenty-three patients who completed evaluation preoperatively and 1 year after surgery were assessed at a 3-year follow-up. Clinical examination was performed preoperatively, and at the 1- and 3-year follow-ups, with the pelvic organ prolapse quantification system. Symptom assessment was performed with a validated bowel function questionnaire including questions on sexual function.
RESULTS: There were no graft-related complications during the 3 years following surgery. Preoperatively, all patients had stage II prolapse of the posterior vaginal wall and a rectocele verified at defecography. At the 1-year follow-up, 11 of 29 patients (38%) had rectocele of stage II or more, and 4 patients were reoperated. At 3-year follow-up 7 of 23 patients (30%) had rectocele of stage II or more. When including the 4 early anatomical recurrences, a total of 11 of 27 patients (41%) had rectocele of stage II or more at 3-year follow-up. Preoperatively, all patients reported varying degrees of rectal emptying difficulties and symptoms of bowel dysfunction. There was a significant decrease in rectal emptying difficulties (P < .01), sense of incomplete evacuation (P < .01), need for manually assisted defecation (P < .05), and symptoms of pelvic heaviness (P < .001) at the 3-year follow-up compared with preoperatively. Cure of rectal emptying difficulties was reported by fewer than 50% of patients. There were no significant changes in anal incontinence scores or symptoms of sexual dysfunction at the 3-year follow-up compared with preoperatively.
CONCLUSION: Rectocele repair using porcine dermal graft was associated with an unsatisfactory anatomical cure rate and persistent bowel-emptying difficulties in the majority of patients 3 years postoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II-3.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16394040     DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000192547.58102.ab

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  17 in total

1.  Long-term outcomes after native tissue vs. biological graft-augmented repair in the posterior compartment.

Authors:  Cara L Grimes; Jasmine Tan-Kim; Emily L Whitcomb; Emily S Lukacz; Shawn A Menefee
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-11-24       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 2.  Evaluation of current biologic meshes in pelvic organ prolapse repair.

Authors:  Ashley Cox; Sender Herschorn
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 3.  Traditional native tissue versus mesh-augmented pelvic organ prolapse repairs: providing an accurate interpretation of current literature.

Authors:  E J Stanford; A Cassidenti; M D Moen
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 4.  Posterior compartment defect repair in vaginal surgery: update on surgical techniques.

Authors:  Van Anh T Ginger; Kathleen C Kobashi
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 5.  Surgery for posterior vaginal wall prolapse.

Authors:  Mickey Karram; Christopher Maher
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 6.  The role of synthetic and biologic materials in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Ramon A Brown; C Neal Ellis
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2014-12

7.  Anal incontinence and bowel dysfunction after sacrocolpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse.

Authors:  Catharina Forsgren; Jan Zetterström; Anju Zhang; Anastasia Iliadou; Annika Lopez; Daniel Altman
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2010-05-07       Impact factor: 2.894

8.  Morbidity and functional mid-term outcomes using Prolift pelvic floor repair systems.

Authors:  Sébastien Kozal; Thomas Ripert; Younes Bayoud; Johan Menard; Ioannis Nicolacopoulos; Laurence Bednarzyck; Frederic Staerman; Stéphane Larré
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 1.862

9.  Sexual function in women after rectocele repair with acellular porcine dermis graft vs site-specific rectovaginal fascia repair.

Authors:  Joseph M Novi; Catherine S Bradley; Najjia N Mahmoud; Mark A Morgan; Lily A Arya
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2007-01-11

10.  Constipation and obstructed defecation.

Authors:  Scott R Steele; Anders Mellgren
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2007-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.