Literature DB >> 29210807

Restoring Genital Hiatus to Normative Values After Apical Suspension Alone Versus With Level 3 Support Procedures.

Charelle M Carter-Brooks, Jerry L Lowder1, Angela L Du2, Erin S Lavelle, Lauren E Giugale, Jonathan P Shepherd3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate postoperative genital hiatus after apical suspension procedures without a level 3 support procedure (L3SP), posterior repair, and perineorrhaphy, compared with normative-value genital hiatus of 3.4 cm.
METHODS: This an analysis of a pre-existing retrospectively collected database that included all minimally invasive sacrocolpopexies and uterosacral ligament suspensions performed at a tertiary medical center from January 2009 to August 2015.
RESULTS: We identified 1006 surgical cases: 160 (15.9%) apical suspensions with L3SPs and 846 (84.1%) without. Mean (SD) age was 59 (9) years and body mass index was 27.6 (4.7) kg/m. Women were mainly white (97.4%) with stage III prolapse (67.8%). Those who underwent L3SPs were more likely to be premenopausal and undergo hysterectomy and USLS.Baseline genital hiatus was similar with and without L3SPs (4.8 [1.2] cm vs 4.6 [1.1] cm, P = 0.096). Postoperative genital hiatus was reduced beyond normative (3.4 cm) after apical suspension without (3.0 [0.7] cm, P < 0.001) and with (2.8 [0.9] cm, P < 0.001) L3SPs. Postoperative genital hiatus after L3SPs was similar to those without (2.8 [0.9] cm vs 3.0 [0.7] cm, P = 0.06). We found that change in genital hiatus was greater, by 0.7 cm, when L3SP was performed versus not performed (2.3 [1.2] cm vs 1.6 [1.1] cm, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Level 3 support procedures may be unnecessary to restore genital hiatus to normal at time of apical suspension procedures and should be reserved for select patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 29210807     DOI: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000528

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 2151-8378            Impact factor:   2.091


  8 in total

Review 1.  Surgical Repair of the Genital Hiatus: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Jacqueline Y Kikuchi; Keila S Muñiz; Victoria L Handa
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  Association between adjuvant posterior repair and success of native tissue apical suspension.

Authors:  Gary Sutkin; Halina M Zyczynski; Amaanti Sridhar; J Eric Jelovsek; Charles R Rardin; Donna Mazloomdoost; David D Rahn; John N Nguyen; Uduak U Andy; Isuzu Meyer; Marie G Gantz
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2019-08-23       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 3.  Hiatal failure: effects of pregnancy, delivery, and pelvic floor disorders on level III factors.

Authors:  Wenjin Cheng; Emily English; Whitney Horner; Carolyn W Swenson; Luyun Chen; Fernanda Pipitone; James A Ashton-Miller; John O L DeLancey
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2022-09-21       Impact factor: 1.932

4.  How does office assessment of prolapse compare to what is seen in the operating room?

Authors:  Rui Wang; Elena Tunitsky-Bitton
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 1.932

5.  Does concurrent posterior repair for an asymptomatic rectocele reduce the risk of surgical failure in patients undergoing sacrocolpopexy?

Authors:  Olivia H Chang; Emily R W Davidson; Tonya N Thomas; Marie Fidela R Paraiso; Cecile A Ferrando
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2020-03-07       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 6.  Outcomes collected in female pelvic floor surgical procedure registries and databases: a scoping review.

Authors:  Rasa Ruseckaite; Justin O Daly; Joanne Dean; Susannah Ahern
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 2.894

7.  Prospective evaluation of genital hiatus in patients undergoing surgical prolapse repair.

Authors:  Mildrede Bonglack; Erin Maetzold; Kimberly A Kenne; Catherine S Bradley; Joseph T Kowalski
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2022-03-17       Impact factor: 1.932

8.  Immediate Postoperative Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification Measures and 2-Year Risk of Prolapse Recurrence.

Authors:  Lauren N Siff; Matthew D Barber; Halina M Zyczynski; Charles R Rardin; Sharon Jakus-Waldman; David D Rahn; Ariana L Smith; Donna Mazloomdoost; Amaanti Sridhar; Marie G Gantz
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 7.623

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.