INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective of this study was to compare the Manchester Fothergill (MF) procedure with vaginal hysterectomy (VH) as surgical treatment of uterine descent. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent MF were matched for prolapse grade, age and parity to consecutive patients treated with VH. Evaluated outcomes included functional outcome, morbidity, recurrence of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and sexual function. Follow-up was performed using validated questionnaires. RESULTS: We included 196 patients (98 patients per group). The response rate after a follow-up of 4-9 years was 80%. We found no differences in functional outcome and recurrence rates of POP between groups. Blood loss was significantly less and operating time was significantly shorter in the MF group. However, incomplete emptying of the bladder was more common in the MF group. CONCLUSIONS: The MF procedure is equally effective to the VH and should be considered as a surgical option that allows preservation of the uterus.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective of this study was to compare the Manchester Fothergill (MF) procedure with vaginal hysterectomy (VH) as surgical treatment of uterine descent. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent MF were matched for prolapse grade, age and parity to consecutive patients treated with VH. Evaluated outcomes included functional outcome, morbidity, recurrence of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and sexual function. Follow-up was performed using validated questionnaires. RESULTS: We included 196 patients (98 patients per group). The response rate after a follow-up of 4-9 years was 80%. We found no differences in functional outcome and recurrence rates of POP between groups. Blood loss was significantly less and operating time was significantly shorter in the MF group. However, incomplete emptying of the bladder was more common in the MF group. CONCLUSIONS: The MF procedure is equally effective to the VH and should be considered as a surgical option that allows preservation of the uterus.
Authors: Robert A Hakvoort; Marcel G Dijkgraaf; Matthe P Burger; Mark H Emanuel; Jan Paul W R Roovers Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2009 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: J P W R Roovers; J G van der Bom; C H van der Vaart; J H Schagen van Leeuwen; P C Scholten; A P M Heintz Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2005 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Sofia Andrade de Oliveira; Marcelo C M Fonseca; Maria A T Bortolini; Manoel J B C Girão; Matheus T Roque; Rodrigo A Castro Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2017-08-05 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Georgina Baines; Natalia Price; Helen Jefferis; Rufus Cartwright; Simon R Jackson Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2019-04-30 Impact factor: 2.894