Literature DB >> 33830303

Cross sectional study on assessment of ring pessary cleaning and removal every six months: adverse events and complications.

Suelene Costa de Albuquerque Coelho1, Gláucia Miranda Varella Pereira1, Luiz Gustavo Oliveira Brito1, Cássia Raquel Teatin Juliato2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Despite its frequent use, there is little evidence of adequate management of pessaries for treating pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Thus, the aims the study were to assess the rate of complications in women using ring-type pessaries with cleaning and monitoring every 6 months and to correlate the time of use of the pessary with possible complications.
METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study including women diagnosed with stage 3 or 4 genital prolapse, who were already in outpatient follow-up and who used a ring pessary. We excluded patients using another type of pessary, with severe comorbidities and with POP-Q ≤ 2 staging. The chi-square test or Fisher exact test was applied for categorical variables, the t-test for continuous variables with normal distribution and Mann-Whitney test for non-parametric variables.
RESULTS: A total of 83 women using a ring pessary were assessed. The mean in months of pessary use was 31.8 ± 14.9 months. Vaginal discharge was the most frequent complaint representing 26.5%, followed by foul smell in 13.3%. No significant correlation was found between length of pessary use and clinical variables. However, a significant correlation was found between immediate complications and the length of pessary use (21.3 ± 5.9 months; p < 0.0044).
CONCLUSION: There was no increase in complication rate in the continuous use of a ring pessary with cleaning and monitoring every 6 months. Determining a follow-up time that reduces the risk of complications is necessary not only for the organization of the attendance services, allowing a greater number of monitored patients, but also for the access of patients who need regular monitoring.
© 2021. The International Urogynecological Association.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Follow-up; Pelvic organ prolapse; Pessary; Treatment; Women

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33830303     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-021-04775-1

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


  26 in total

1.  Accuracy of the cytopathology, bacterioscopy, and vaginal flora culture.

Authors:  P Q Almeida; M A P Pereira; F S Palomo; C Okazaki; M A Schimidt; N M G Speck; J C L Ribalta
Journal:  Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 0.146

Review 2.  Pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Matthew D Barber
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-07-20

3.  The distribution of pelvic organ support in a population of female subjects seen for routine gynecologic health care.

Authors:  S E Swift
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  A simplified protocol for pessary management.

Authors:  V Wu; S A Farrell; T F Baskett; G Flowerdew
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 7.661

5.  Reliability of diagnosing bacterial vaginosis is improved by a standardized method of gram stain interpretation.

Authors:  R P Nugent; M A Krohn; S L Hillier
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Survey of the characteristics and satisfaction degree of the patients using a pessary.

Authors:  Sang Wook Bai; Bo Sung Yoon; Ja Young Kwon; Jong Seung Shin; Sei Kwang Kim; Ki Hyun Park
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2004-12-01

Review 7.  Female pelvic organ prolapse using pessaries: systematic review.

Authors:  Suelene Costa de Albuquerque Coelho; Edilson Benedito de Castro; Cássia Raquel Teatin Juliato
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-03-18       Impact factor: 2.894

8.  Nonspecific vaginitis. Diagnostic criteria and microbial and epidemiologic associations.

Authors:  R Amsel; P A Totten; C A Spiegel; K C Chen; D Eschenbach; K K Holmes
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1983-01       Impact factor: 4.965

Review 9.  Epidemiology and outcome assessment of pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Matthew D Barber; Christopher Maher
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 10.  Risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse and its recurrence: a systematic review.

Authors:  Tineke F M Vergeldt; Mirjam Weemhoff; Joanna IntHout; Kirsten B Kluivers
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-05-13       Impact factor: 2.894

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.