Literature DB >> 23640006

Operation for recurrent cystocele with anterior colporrhaphy or non-absorbable mesh: patient reported outcomes.

Emil Karl Nüssler1, Susanne Greisen, Ulrik Schiøler Kesmodel, Mats Löfgren, Karl Møller Bek, Marianne Glavind-Kristensen.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to compare patient reported outcomes and complications after repair of recurrent anterior vaginal wall prolapse in routine health care settings using standard anterior colporrhaphy or non-absorbable mesh.
METHODS: The study is based on prospective data from the Swedish National Register for Gynaecological Surgery. 286 women were operated on for recurrent anterior vaginal wall prolapse in 2008-2010; 157 women had an anterior colporrhaphy and 129 were operated on with a non-absorbable mesh. Pre-, and perioperative data were collected from doctors and patients. Patient reported outcomes were evaluated 2 months and 12 months after the operation.
RESULTS: After 12 months, the odds ratio (OR) of patient reported cure was 2.90 (1.34-6.31) after mesh implants compared with anterior colporrhaphy. Both patient- and doctor-reported complications were found more often in the mesh group. However, no differences in serious complications were found. Thus, an organ lesion was found in 2.3% after mesh implant compared with 2.5% after anterior colporrhaphy (p = 0.58). Two patients in the mesh group (1.2%) were re-operated compared with 1 patient (0.6%) in the anterior colporrhaphy group (p = 0.58). The infection rate was higher after mesh (8.5%) than after anterior colporrhaphy (2.5%; OR 3.19 ; 1.07-14.25).
CONCLUSION: Implantation of synthetic mesh during operation for recurrent cystocele more than doubled the cure rate, whereas no differences in serious complications were found between the groups. However, mesh increased the risk of infection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23640006     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-013-2110-2

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


  26 in total

1.  Epidemiologic evaluation of reoperation for surgically treated pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence.

Authors:  Amanda L Clark; Thomas Gregory; Virginia J Smith; Renee Edwards
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 2.  Symptoms and outcome measures of pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Matthew D Barber
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.190

3.  Does the Prolift system cause dyspareunia?

Authors:  Joye K Lowman; Leticia A Jones; Patrick J Woodman; Douglass S Hale
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-11-05       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  The IUGA/ICS classification of complications of prosthesis and graft insertion: a comparative experience in incontinence and prolapse surgery.

Authors:  C Skala; K Renezeder; S Albrich; A Puhl; R M Laterza; G Naumann; H Koelbl
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-07-26       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 5.  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

Review 6.  Impact of patient-reported outcome measures on routine practice: a structured review.

Authors:  Susan Marshall; Kirstie Haywood; Ray Fitzpatrick
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 2.431

7.  Vaginal wall descensus and pelvic floor symptoms in older women.

Authors:  Catherine S Bradley; Ingrid E Nygaard
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  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

9.  Predictive value of prolapse symptoms: a large database study.

Authors:  Jasmine S Tan; Emily S Lukacz; Shawn A Menefee; Curt R Powell; Charles W Nager
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2004-10-23

10.  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

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Recurrent pelvic organ prolapse: International Urogynecological Association Research and Development Committee opinion.

Authors:  Sharif Ismail; Jonathan Duckett; Diaa Rizk; Olanrewaju Sorinola; Dorothy Kammerer-Doak; Oscar Contreras-Ortiz; Hazem Al-Mandeel; Kamil Svabik; Mitesh Parekh; Christian Phillips
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-07-05       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 2.  Prosthetic surgery versus native tissue repair of cystocele: literature review.

Authors:  Salvatore Giovanni Vitale; Antonio Simone Laganà; Ferdinando Antonio Gulino; Alessandro Tropea; Susanna Tarda
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2016-01-22

3.  Repair of recurrent rectocele with posterior colporrhaphy or non-absorbable polypropylene mesh-patient-reported outcomes at 1-year follow-up.

Authors:  Emil Nüssler; Gabriel Granåsen; Emil Karl Nüssler; Marie Bixo; Mats Löfgren
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-01-09       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Impact of surgeon experience on routine prolapse operations.

Authors:  Emil Nüssler; Jacob Kjær Eskildsen; Emil Karl Nüssler; Marie Bixo; Mats Löfgren
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2017-06-02       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Decisions to use surgical mesh in operations for pelvic organ prolapse: a question of geography?

Authors:  Emil Karl Nüssler; Emil Nüssler; Jacob Kjær Eskildsen; Mats Löfgren
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2018-10-20       Impact factor: 2.894

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.