Literature DB >> 21340642

The UK national prolapse survey: 5 years on.

Swati Jha1, Paul Moran.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective of this study was to assess trends in the surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) amongst UK practitioners and the changes in management since this survey was first conducted 5 years ago.
METHODS: A postal questionnaire survey was sent to practising consultant gynaecologists in UK hospitals. They included urogynaecologists in tertiary centres, gynaecologists with a designated special interest in urogynaecology, and general gynaecologists. The questionnaire included case scenarios encompassing contentious issues in the surgical management of POP and was a revised version of the questionnaire sent 5 years ago.
RESULTS: Two hundred and eighteen responses were received of which 190 were completed. For anterior vaginal wall prolapse, anterior colporrhaphy was still the procedure of choice in 71% of respondents. There was a significant rise in graft usage, particularly synthetic graft for recurrent prolapse (56%). A Burch was being performed by only 1% compared to 11% 5 years ago. In women with uterovaginal prolapse, the procedure of choice was still a vaginal hysterectomy and repair (82%). Thirty-five percent of respondents would operate in women whose family was incomplete. In women with posterior vaginal wall prolapse, the procedure of choice was posterior colporrhaphy with midline fascial plication in 66%, marginally less than the previous (75%). For vault prolapse, 73% of respondents would operate, and 43% would perform urodynamics prior to surgery. The procedure of choice was an abdominal sacrocolpopexy (44%), slightly greater than 5 years ago when it was 38%.
CONCLUSIONS: Basic trends in prolapse surgery remain unchanged. The increase in the use of grafts is in patients with recurrent prolapse.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21340642     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-011-1379-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urogynecol J        ISSN: 0937-3462            Impact factor:   2.894


  7 in total

1.  The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction.

Authors:  R C Bump; A Mattiasson; K Bø; L P Brubaker; J O DeLancey; P Klarskov; B L Shull; A R Smith
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  National survey on the management of prolapse in the UK.

Authors:  Swati Jha; Paul A Moran
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.696

Review 3.  Efficacy and safety of using mesh or grafts in surgery for anterior and/or posterior vaginal wall prolapse: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  X Jia; C Glazener; G Mowatt; G MacLennan; C Bain; C Fraser; J Burr
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2008-08-19       Impact factor: 6.531

4.  Management of anterior vaginal prolapse in South Africa: national survey.

Authors:  E W Henn; J A van Rensburg; H S Cronje
Journal:  S Afr Med J       Date:  2009-04

5.  Survey of current management of prolapse in Australia and New Zealand.

Authors:  Ruben Vanspauwen; Elvis Seman; Peter Dwyer
Journal:  Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.100

6.  Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence.

Authors:  A L Olsen; V J Smith; J O Bergstrom; J C Colling; A L Clark
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  Signs of genital prolapse in a Swedish population of women 20 to 59 years of age and possible related factors.

Authors:  E C Samuelsson; F T Victor; G Tibblin; K F Svärdsudd
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 8.661

  7 in total
  27 in total

1.  The mesh debate.

Authors:  Peter L Dwyer; Paul Riss
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  On the relevance of uniaxial tensile testing of urogynecological prostheses: the effect of displacement rate.

Authors:  Tony Bazi; Ali H Ammouri; Ramsey F Hamade
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-05-15       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Practice pattern variation in surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence in The Netherlands.

Authors:  Mèlanie N van IJsselmuiden; Renée J Detollenaere; Maaike Y Kampen; Marian K Engberts; Hugo W F van Eijndhoven
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-07-06       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Big data: why ignorance is no longer acceptable.

Authors:  Philip Toozs-Hobson; Nicholas Toozs-Hobson; Thomas Kelley
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2018-05-25       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Trends in apical prolapse surgery between 2010 and 2016 in Denmark.

Authors:  Karen Ruben Husby; Gunnar Lose; Niels Klarskov
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-01-04       Impact factor: 2.894

6.  Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse and uterine descent in the Netherlands.

Authors:  R J Detollenaere; J den Boon; K B Kluivers; M E Vierhout; H W F van Eijndhoven
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-09-22       Impact factor: 2.894

7.  Pelvic organ prolapse surgical management in Portugal and FDA safety communication have an impact on vaginal mesh.

Authors:  Teresa Mascarenhas; Miguel Mascarenhas-Saraiva; Amélia Ricon-Ferraz; Paula Nogueira; Fernando Lopes; Alberto Freitas
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2014-08-16       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 8.  The Manchester procedure versus vaginal hysterectomy in the treatment of uterine prolapse: a review.

Authors:  Cæcilie Krogsgaard Tolstrup; Gunnar Lose; Niels Klarskov
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 2.894

9.  The accuracy of comparing laparoscopic hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy for the treatment of uterovaginal prolapse.

Authors:  Ismail Alay; Cihan Kaya; Hüseyin Cengiz
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 2.894

10.  Transvaginal uterosacral ligament hysteropexy: a retrospective feasibility study.

Authors:  Rodolfo Milani; Matteo Frigerio; Stefano Manodoro; Alice Cola; Federico Spelzini
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-05-19       Impact factor: 2.894

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.