Literature DB >> 21723594

Prolapse follow-up at 5 years or more: myth or reality?

Rubiao Ou1, Xian-Jin Xie, Philippe E Zimmern.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To study the loss to follow-up (LTF) rate in level I/II evidence-based studies related to the surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse (POP).
METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (level I) or nonrandomized but prospective studies (level II) related to the surgical treatment of POP from January 1995 to November 2010 were searched in PubMed. Data reviewed included types of study, number of participating centers, sample size calculation, surgical techniques, power calculation, estimated dropout rate, duration of follow-up, and rate and reasons for LTF.
RESULTS: Forty-eight articles (4776 women)--22 randomized controlled trials and 26 nonrandomized prospective studies--met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-one articles gave details on sample size calculation, and only 5 explained their LTF rate after reaching LTF patients by mail or telephone. Percentages of LTF patients were 9.8% (255/2609) at ≤12 months in 26 articles, 15% (184/1232) at 24 months in 12 articles, 27% (114/420) at 36 months in 8 articles, 44% (272/615) at 60 months in 4 articles, and 60% (273/456) at >60 months in 3 articles. Fifteen articles reported no missing data, mostly because of small sample size or short follow-up. Only 3 articles defined LTF patients as treatment failure or successes and reported outcomes accordingly.
CONCLUSIONS: An acceptable attrition rate (10-20%) in studies with a 2-3-year follow-up period was noted, but a much higher rate in studies extending 3-5 years out. Meaningful long-term follow-up reporting at 5 years, as usually recommended after POP repair, seems unrealistic.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21723594     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2011.02.069

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  7 in total

1.  Long-term functional outcomes following non-radiated urethrovaginal fistula repair.

Authors:  Dominic Lee; Philippe E Zimmern
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-06-07       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Functional outcomes of synthetic tape and mesh revision surgeries: a monocentric experience.

Authors:  Salima Ismail; Emmanuel Chartier-Kastler; Christine Reus; Jérémy Cohen; Thomas Seisen; Véronique Phé
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  [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

4.  Are women with advanced pelvic organ prolapse treated by open mesh sacrocolpopexy at risk of secondary incisional hernia?

Authors:  Feras Alhalabi; Chasta D Bacsu; Omer Gulpinar; Daniel J Scott; Philippe E Zimmern
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-06-17       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Long-term outcomes of a randomized controlled trial comparing trans-obturator vaginal mesh with native tissue repair in the treatment of anterior vaginal wall prolapse.

Authors:  Lucie Allègre; Geertje Callewaert; Sandrine Alonso; Arnaud Cornille; Hervé Fernandez; Georges Eglin; Renaud de Tayrac
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-09-10       Impact factor: 2.894

6.  Long-term outcomes of robotic mesh sacrocolpopexy.

Authors:  Karen Jong; Ted Klein; Philippe E Zimmern
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-10-04

7.  Long-term outcomes of transvaginal mesh surgery for pelvic organ prolapse: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Xiaojuan Wang; Yisong Chen; Changdong Hu; Keqin Hua
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2021-10-11       Impact factor: 2.809

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.