INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Genital prolapse affects up to 50 % of multiparous women and has an impact on quality of life (QoL) for many. Vaginal obliterative techniques are relevant in older patients who are not sexually active. We performed Labhardt's colpoperineocleisis in such patients. The objective was the evaluation of subjective outcomes of this technique using PGI-I. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis of patients. We performed a bivariate, multivariate analysis, and survival curves for subjective improvement. RESULTS: Seventy-four cases were analyzed. Average age of the patients was 72 years, median parity 4, 95.9 % POP-Q stage III or IV, anterior leading edge defect in 61.1 %. Operating time: 54 min, estimated blood loss 70 ml, no intraoperative complications, 12 patients had protocol deviations with changes in the recommended type of suture. Median hospital stay was 2 days and average follow-up 24.9 months. There was 13.5 % anatomical recurrence, 3 of which (30 %) were in patients with protocol deviations. 1.9 % developed clinically significant de novo stress urinary incontinence (SUI). PGI-I: 64 (86 %) reported subjective improvement and 10 did not. In the subjective improvement group, 98.4 % reported being very much or much better. In the non-subjective improvement group 80 % reported that they were the same as before surgery and 20 % were worse. In bivariate analysis anatomical recurrence showed significance and persisted after multivariate analysis with an OR of 8322 for subjective failure. CONCLUSION: Labhardt's colpoperineocleisis is a safe technique with good subjective results. It has few complications, an acceptable recurrence rate, and a low rate of de novo SUI. It may be important to use the #0 or #1 polydioxanone sutures, as these are associated with better outcomes in this series. Comparative studies with other obliterative techniques are needed.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Genital prolapse affects up to 50 % of multiparous women and has an impact on quality of life (QoL) for many. Vaginal obliterative techniques are relevant in older patients who are not sexually active. We performed Labhardt's colpoperineocleisis in such patients. The objective was the evaluation of subjective outcomes of this technique using PGI-I. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis of patients. We performed a bivariate, multivariate analysis, and survival curves for subjective improvement. RESULTS: Seventy-four cases were analyzed. Average age of the patients was 72 years, median parity 4, 95.9 % POP-Q stage III or IV, anterior leading edge defect in 61.1 %. Operating time: 54 min, estimated blood loss 70 ml, no intraoperative complications, 12 patients had protocol deviations with changes in the recommended type of suture. Median hospital stay was 2 days and average follow-up 24.9 months. There was 13.5 % anatomical recurrence, 3 of which (30 %) were in patients with protocol deviations. 1.9 % developed clinically significant de novo stress urinary incontinence (SUI). PGI-I: 64 (86 %) reported subjective improvement and 10 did not. In the subjective improvement group, 98.4 % reported being very much or much better. In the non-subjective improvement group 80 % reported that they were the same as before surgery and 20 % were worse. In bivariate analysis anatomical recurrence showed significance and persisted after multivariate analysis with an OR of 8322 for subjective failure. CONCLUSION:Labhardt's colpoperineocleisis is a safe technique with good subjective results. It has few complications, an acceptable recurrence rate, and a low rate of de novo SUI. It may be important to use the #0 or #1 polydioxanone sutures, as these are associated with better outcomes in this series. Comparative studies with other obliterative techniques are needed.
Authors: Seshadri Kasturi; Miriam Bentley-Taylor; Patrick J Woodman; Colin L Terry; Douglass S Hale Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2012-03-09 Impact factor: 2.894
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: Thomas L Wheeler; Holly E Richter; Kathryn L Burgio; David T Redden; C C Grace Chen; Patricia S Goode; R Edward Varner Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Aimee L Smith; Deborah R Karp; Roger Lefevre; Vivian C Aguilar; G Willy Davila Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2011-05-13 Impact factor: 2.894