Literature DB >> 22543549

Magnetic resonance imaging of abdominal versus vaginal prolapse surgery with mesh.

Shimon Ginath1, Alan D Garely, Jonathan S Luchs, Azin Shahryarinejad, Cedric K Olivera, Sue Zhou, Charles J Ascher-Walsh, Alexander Condrea, Michael L Brodman, Michael D Vardy.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: We compared two surgical approaches in patients with symptomatic prolapse of the vaginal apex with normal controls by analyzing pelvic landmark relationships measured using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before and after surgery.
METHODS: In this prospective multicenter pilot study involving 16 participants, nulliparous controls (n = 6) were compared with ten parous (3.0 ± 1.0) women with uterine apical prolapse equal to or greater than stage 2. Group A (n = 5) underwent abdominal sacral colpopexy with monofilament polypropylene mesh and group B (n = 5) with vaginal mesh kit repair (Total ProLift). Subtotal hysterectomy was performed in all group A and no group B women. All patients underwent preoperative and 3-month postoperative Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) and dynamic MRI. Comparison of MRI pelvic angles and distances was performed and analyzed by Mann-Whitney rank sum test and chi-square test.
RESULTS: Vaginal apical support is similar at 3 months for abdominal sacral colpopexy (ASCP) and ProLift by POP-Q examination and MRI analysis. In both treatment groups, the postoperative POP-Q point C and MRI parameters were similar to nulliparous controls at 3 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Anatomic outcomes for ASCP compared with ProLift were similar at 3 months in terms of vaginal apical support by POP-Q and MRI analysis. Continued comparative analysis of postoperative support with objective imaging seems warranted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22543549     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-012-1783-2

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


  32 in total

Review 1.  Characterizing and reporting pelvic floor defects: the revised New York classification system.

Authors:  R J Scotti; R Flora; W M Greston; L Budnick; J Hutchinson-Colas
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2000

2.  Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging for assessment of minimally invasive pelvic floor reconstruction with polypropylene implant.

Authors:  Katja C Siegmann; Christl Reisenauer; Sina Speck; Sonja Barth; Bernhard Kraemer; Claus D Claussen
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2010-04-10       Impact factor: 3.528

3.  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

Review 4.  The use of prosthetics in pelvic reconstructive surgery.

Authors:  Colin Birch
Journal:  Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2005-09-26       Impact factor: 5.237

5.  Anatomical conditions for pelvic floor reconstruction with polypropylene implant and its application for the treatment of vaginal prolapse.

Authors:  Christl Reisenauer; Andreas Kirschniak; Ulrich Drews; Diethelm Wallwiener
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  2006-05-03       Impact factor: 2.435

Review 6.  Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women: a short version Cochrane review.

Authors:  C Maher; K Baessler; C M A Glazener; E J Adams; S Hagen
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.696

Review 7.  Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women.

Authors:  Christopher Maher; Benjamin Feiner; Kaven Baessler; Elisabeth J Adams; Suzanne Hagen; Cathryn Ma Glazener
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2010-04-14

8.  Pelvic floor descent in women: dynamic evaluation with fast MR imaging and cinematic display.

Authors:  A Yang; J L Mostwin; N B Rosenshein; E A Zerhouni
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  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

10.  Low-weight polypropylene mesh for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Reijo Hiltunen; Kari Nieminen; Teuvo Takala; Eila Heiskanen; Mauri Merikari; Kirsti Niemi; Pentti K Heinonen
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 7.661

View more
  2 in total

1.  Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging before and 6 months after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.

Authors:  Robin M F van der Weiden; Elena Rociu; Guido H H Mannaerts; Marcel H A van Hooff; Mark E Vierhout; Mariella I J Withagen
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-10-22       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  Anatomical and functional changes to the pelvic floor after robotic versus laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: a randomised study.

Authors:  Johanna K Mäkelä-Kaikkonen; Tero T Rautio; Sari Koivurova; Eija Pääkkö; Pasi Ohtonen; Fausto Biancari; Jyrki T Mäkelä
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 2.894

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.