Ying Zhang1. 1. Graduate School of Medical University of Tianjin and the Department of Gynecology, Tianjin Central Hospital Gynecology, Obstetrics, Tianjin, 300100, China. Electronic address: zhangyingzyyt@hotmail.com.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to compare transvaginal intervention and laparoscopic repair for correcting the uterine defect in patients with previous cesarean scar defect (PCSD). DESIGN: Retrospective study (Canadian Task Force classification). SETTING: Previous studies have reported that transvaginal surgery and laparoscopic surgery are available treatment options for patients with PCSD. However, the two methods have not been compared before. PATIENTS: A total of 124 patients with PCSD were included in the retrospective study between December 2010 and December 2014. INTERVENTIONS: In the study, 65 patients received transvaginal repair, and 59 patients received laparoscopic repair. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Operation time, blood loss, hospital stay length and hospitalization expense, clinical syndromes and healing of uterine defect 3 months postoperatively were compared between the two surgical approaches. Patients receiving transvaginal repair exhibited significantly shorter operation time and lower hospitalization expenses than the patients receiving laparoscopic repair. Follow-up data showed that prolonged menstrual bleeding syndrome was obviously improved in 89% of patients undergoing transvaginal intervention and 86% of patients undergoing laparoscopic repair. The uterine defect disappeared or was substantially reduced in 87% of patients undergoing transvaginal intervention and 86% of patients undergoing laparoscopic repair. The differences between the two surgical approaches were insignificant. CONCLUSION: Transvaginal repair is comparably effective to the laparoscopic repair and may be a more cost-effective and convenient surgical approach in the management of patients with PCSD.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to compare transvaginal intervention and laparoscopic repair for correcting the uterine defect in patients with previous cesarean scar defect (PCSD). DESIGN: Retrospective study (Canadian Task Force classification). SETTING: Previous studies have reported that transvaginal surgery and laparoscopic surgery are available treatment options for patients with PCSD. However, the two methods have not been compared before. PATIENTS: A total of 124 patients with PCSD were included in the retrospective study between December 2010 and December 2014. INTERVENTIONS: In the study, 65 patients received transvaginal repair, and 59 patients received laparoscopic repair. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Operation time, blood loss, hospital stay length and hospitalization expense, clinical syndromes and healing of uterine defect 3 months postoperatively were compared between the two surgical approaches. Patients receiving transvaginal repair exhibited significantly shorter operation time and lower hospitalization expenses than the patients receiving laparoscopic repair. Follow-up data showed that prolonged menstrual bleeding syndrome was obviously improved in 89% of patients undergoing transvaginal intervention and 86% of patients undergoing laparoscopic repair. The uterine defect disappeared or was substantially reduced in 87% of patients undergoing transvaginal intervention and 86% of patients undergoing laparoscopic repair. The differences between the two surgical approaches were insignificant. CONCLUSION: Transvaginal repair is comparably effective to the laparoscopic repair and may be a more cost-effective and convenient surgical approach in the management of patients with PCSD.
Authors: Sanne I Stegwee; Astrid Beij; Robert A de Leeuw; Lidwine B Mokkink; Lucet F van der Voet; Judith A F Huirne Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2019-12-16 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Marietta Gulz; Sara Imboden; Konstantinos Nirgianakis; Franziska Siegenthaler; Tilman T Rau; Michael D Mueller Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-02-22 Impact factor: 4.241