Maurizio Serati1, Andrea Braga2, Simona Cantaluppi3, Giorgio Caccia2, Fabio Ghezzi3, Paola Sorice3. 1. Department Obstetrics and Gynecology, Urogynecolgy Unit, University of Insubria, Piazza Biroldi 1, 21100, Varese, Italy. mauserati@hotmail.com. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, EOC - Beata Vergine Hospital, Mendrisio, Switzerland. 3. Department Obstetrics and Gynecology, Urogynecolgy Unit, University of Insubria, Piazza Biroldi 1, 21100, Varese, Italy.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of vaginal native tissue repair and uterine suspension after a follow-up of at least 1 year. METHODS: We included all consecutive women with an anterior vaginal prolapse of stage II or higher and a concomitant uterine prolapse of stage II who underwent this surgical procedure. We considered women with a descensus with maximum point of less than -1 in any compartment as objectively cured. Overall success was defined as no prolapse symptoms, together with a Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) score of 2 or less, prolapse of stage lower than II, and no need for other surgery. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients underwent this surgical procedure during the study period and met all the inclusion criteria for statistical analysis. The mean follow-up was 31 ± 8.2 months; no patient was lost to follow-up. Five patients (4.9%) showed postoperative complications. In terms of subjective outcomes, at the last available follow-up, failure of this surgical procedure was seen in 2% of patients. The objective cure rate and the overall cure rate were the 95.1%. No significant deterioration in objective cure rates was observed over time (p = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Vaginal repair and hysteropexy appear to be an effective and safe option for women with advanced uterovaginal prolapse.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of vaginal native tissue repair and uterine suspension after a follow-up of at least 1 year. METHODS: We included all consecutive women with an anterior vaginal prolapse of stage II or higher and a concomitant uterine prolapse of stage II who underwent this surgical procedure. We considered women with a descensus with maximum point of less than -1 in any compartment as objectively cured. Overall success was defined as no prolapse symptoms, together with a Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) score of 2 or less, prolapse of stage lower than II, and no need for other surgery. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients underwent this surgical procedure during the study period and met all the inclusion criteria for statistical analysis. The mean follow-up was 31 ± 8.2 months; no patient was lost to follow-up. Five patients (4.9%) showed postoperative complications. In terms of subjective outcomes, at the last available follow-up, failure of this surgical procedure was seen in 2% of patients. The objective cure rate and the overall cure rate were the 95.1%. No significant deterioration in objective cure rates was observed over time (p = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Vaginal repair and hysteropexy appear to be an effective and safe option for women with advanced uterovaginal prolapse.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cystocele; Hysteropexy; Pelvic organ prolapse (POP); Transverse cystocele repair
Authors: Werner Schäfer; Paul Abrams; Limin Liao; Anders Mattiasson; Francesco Pesce; Anders Spangberg; Arthur M Sterling; Norman R Zinner; Philip van Kerrebroeck Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2002 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Bernard T Haylen; Dirk de Ridder; Robert M Freeman; Steven E Swift; Bary Berghmans; Joseph Lee; Ash Monga; Eckhard Petri; Diaa E Rizk; Peter K Sand; Gabriel N Schaer Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2009-11-25 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Nicole B Korbly; Nadine C Kassis; Meadow M Good; Monica L Richardson; Nicole M Book; Sallis Yip; Docile Saguan; Carey Gross; Janelle Evans; Vrishali V Lopes; Heidi S Harvie; Vivian W Sung Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2013-08-03 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Renée J Detollenaere; Jan den Boon; Jelle Stekelenburg; Joanna IntHout; Mark E Vierhout; Kirsten B Kluivers; Hugo W F van Eijndhoven Journal: BMJ Date: 2015-07-23