INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate changes in anorectal symptoms before and after pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery, using laparoscopic sacrocolpoperineopexy. METHODS: Preoperative and postoperative anorectal symptoms, colorectal-anal distress inventory (CRADI) and colorectal-anal impact questionnaire (CRAIQ) scores were prospectively compared from 90 consecutive women undergoing laparoscopic sacrocolpoperineopexy. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 30.7 months, laparoscopic surgery significantly worsened CRADI (p = 0.02) with no effect on CRAIQ (p = 0.37) scores. Post-operative and de novo straining (27%) and the need for digital assistance (17%) were the most frequent anorectal symptoms. No correlation was found between laparoscopic surgery and anorectal symptoms after multivariate analysis (OR = 2.45[95% confidence interval 0.99-6.05], p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Anorectal symptoms are not improved after POP surgery by laparoscopic sacrocolpoperineopexy.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate changes in anorectal symptoms before and after pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery, using laparoscopic sacrocolpoperineopexy. METHODS: Preoperative and postoperative anorectal symptoms, colorectal-anal distress inventory (CRADI) and colorectal-anal impact questionnaire (CRAIQ) scores were prospectively compared from 90 consecutive women undergoing laparoscopic sacrocolpoperineopexy. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 30.7 months, laparoscopic surgery significantly worsened CRADI (p = 0.02) with no effect on CRAIQ (p = 0.37) scores. Post-operative and de novo straining (27%) and the need for digital assistance (17%) were the most frequent anorectal symptoms. No correlation was found between laparoscopic surgery and anorectal symptoms after multivariate analysis (OR = 2.45[95% confidence interval 0.99-6.05], p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Anorectal symptoms are not improved after POP surgery by laparoscopic sacrocolpoperineopexy.
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
Authors: Mèlanie N van IJsselmuiden; Manon H Kerkhof; René P Schellart; Marlies Y Bongers; Wilbert A Spaans; Hugo W F van Eijndhoven Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2014-12-19 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Cara L Grimes; Megan O Schimpf; Cecilia K Wieslander; Ambereen Sleemi; Paula Doyle; You Maria Wu; Ruchira Singh; Ethan M Balk; David D Rahn Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2019-06-29 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Marine Lallemant; A T M Grob; M Puyraveau; M A G Perik; A H H Alhafidh; M Cosson; R Ramanah Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-09-29 Impact factor: 4.996
Authors: J C Martín Del Olmo; M Toledano; M L Martín Esteban; M A Montenegro; J R Gómez; P Concejo; M Rodríguez de Castro; F Del Rio Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-07-11 Impact factor: 4.584