Literature DB >> 25656453

The effect of pelvic factures on future stress incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse surgery.

Blayne Welk1, Hana'a Al-Hothi, Jennifer Winick-Ng, Queena Chou, Barry MacMillan, Abdel-Rahman Lawendy.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Pelvic fractures in women significantly disrupt the pelvic floor, which may cause stress urinary incontinence (SUI) or pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Our objective was to assess the incidence of operative treatment for SUI and POP after pelvic fracture.
METHODS: We used administrative data from Ontario, Canada, to conduct a retrospective cohort study. Female patients who underwent operative repair of a pelvic fracture between 2002 and 2010 were identified. The primary outcomes were the subsequent surgical treatment of SUI or POP. To compare the incidence with that of the general population, patients who had operative repair of a pelvic fracture were matched (1:2) to a person in the general population (with a propensity score to account for measurable potential confounders). Our primary analysis was a Cox proportional hazards model to compare hazard ratios (HR) in subjects with a pelvic facture and those without.
RESULTS: We identified 390 female patients with a median age of 47 (IQR 30-67) years. Our median follow-up period was 5.9 (4.1-8.3) years. The absolute risk of SUI surgery after pelvic fracture was 3.3 % (13 out of 390) compared with 1.0 % (8 out of 769) in the matched general population sample. The HR for SUI surgery was 5.8 (95 % CI 2.2-15.1). The absolute risk of POP surgery after pelvic fracture was 1.8 % (7 out of 390) compared with 0.9 % (7 out of 769) in the matched general population. The HR for POP surgery was 2.3 (95 % CI 0.9-5.8).
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who had a pelvic fracture requiring operative repair, there appears to be a significantly increased chance of surgery for SUI, but not for POP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25656453     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-014-2624-2

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


  29 in total

Review 1.  Current concepts in female stress urinary incontinence.

Authors:  R M Long; S K Giri; H D Flood
Journal:  Surgeon       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 2.392

2.  Development of the Canadian Marginalization Index: a new tool for the study of inequality.

Authors:  Flora I Matheson; James R Dunn; Katherine L W Smith; Rahim Moineddin; Richard H Glazier
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2012-04-30

3.  Vaginal mesh repair: is it appropriate for pelvic organ prolapse in a nulliparous female following pelvic ring fracture?

Authors:  N Rajamaheswari; Archana Bharti Chhikara; Sugandha Agarwal
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-08-14       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Urinary incontinence after pelvic trauma: a case report.

Authors:  B Küpeli; Y Kordan; T Alkibay
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 2.370

5.  Pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the United States, 1997.

Authors:  Jeanette S Brown; L Elaine Waetjen; Leslee L Subak; David H Thom; Stephen Van den Eeden; Eric Vittinghoff
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 8.661

6.  Trends in stress urinary incontinence inpatient procedures in the United States, 1979-2004.

Authors:  Sallie S Oliphant; Li Wang; Clareann H Bunker; Jerry L Lowder
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 8.661

7.  What outcomes are important for patients after pelvic trauma? Subjective responses and psychometric analysis of three published pelvic-specific outcome instruments.

Authors:  Kelly A Lefaivre; Gerard P Slobogean; Jacqueline T Ngai; Henry M Broekhuyse; Peter J O'Brien
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 2.512

Review 8.  A systematic review of clinical studies on hereditary factors in pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Sabrina L Lince; Leon C van Kempen; Mark E Vierhout; Kirsten B Kluivers
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-03-16       Impact factor: 2.894

9.  Statistical criteria for selecting the optimal number of untreated subjects matched to each treated subject when using many-to-one matching on the propensity score.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-08-28       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 10.  The integral system.

Authors:  Peter Petros
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2011-09-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.