A comparison of different pelvic reconstruction surgeries using mesh for pelvic organ prolapse patients

被引:11
|
作者
Bai, SW
Kim, EH
Shin, JS
Kim, SK
Park, KH
Lee, DH
机构
[1] Yonsei Univ, Coll Med, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Seoul 120752, South Korea
[2] Yonsei Univ, Coll Med, Dept Prevent Med & Publ Hlth, Seoul 120752, South Korea
关键词
pelvic organ prolapse; pelvic reconstruction; mesh;
D O I
10.3349/ymj.2005.46.1.112
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
This study was carried out in order to compare the effects in different surgeries using mesh in pelvic organ prolapse patients whose leading points were C. Thirty-nine patients were categorized into 3 groups: group A pelvic reconstruction with hysterectomy; group B hysterectomy prior to pelvic reconstruction; and group C pelvic reconstruction with uterus preserved. At first visit, POP-Q stage was determined, and age, BMI, admission days, operation time, post-operative stage and complications were observed and results were analyzed and compared. All patients who were operated upon converted to stage one month following the operation, and no further change was observed except in one patient. Group admission days were not significantly different, but tended to be lower in group C. Group average operation times between 'group A and B' and 'group A and C' were statistically different. No significant difference was observed in post-operative complications between the groups, but 3 members of group A developed erosion, whereas no erosion occurred in groups B and C. Pelvic reconstruction using mesh is a highly efficient method of treating pelvic organ prolapse. Improvements in stage and post-operative complications were not significantly different in the groups. However, uteropexy showed a shorter operation time, fewer admission days, and less erosion due to mesh than conventional pelvic reconstruction with hysterectomy.
引用
收藏
页码:112 / 118
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Evaluation of current synthetic mesh materials in pelvic organ prolapse repair
    Kanagarajah P.
    Ayyathurai R.
    Gomez C.
    Current Urology Reports, 2012, 13 (3) : 240 - 246
  • [32] Pelvic organ prolapse
    Wagner A.
    Pahernik S.
    Pandey A.
    Journal für Urologie und Urogynäkologie/Österreich, 2019, 26 (3): : 87 - 91
  • [33] Pelvic Organ Prolapse
    Collins, Sarah
    Lewicky-Gaupp, Christina
    GASTROENTEROLOGY CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2022, 51 (01) : 177 - 193
  • [34] Lower urinary tract symptoms in female patients with pelvic organ prolapse: Efficacy of pelvic floor reconstruction
    Obinata, Daisuke
    Yamaguchi, Kenya
    Ito, Akiko
    Murata, Yasutaka
    Ashikari, Daisaku
    Igarashi, Tomohiro
    Sato, Katsuhiko
    Mochida, Junichi
    Yamanaka, Yataro
    Takahashi, Satoru
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2014, 21 (03) : 301 - 307
  • [35] Vaginal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse using mesh and a vaginal support device
    Carey, M.
    Slack, M.
    Higgs, P.
    Wynn-Williams, M.
    Cornish, A.
    BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2008, 115 (03) : 391 - 397
  • [36] Pelvic Organ Prolapse
    不详
    FEMALE PELVIC MEDICINE AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2019, 25 (06): : 397 - 408
  • [37] Pelvic Organ Prolapse
    Saldanha, Christina
    PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT CLINICS, 2022, 7 (03) : 485 - 497
  • [38] Comparison of transvaginal mesh surgery and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse
    Kusuda, Mayuko
    Kagami, Keiko
    Takahashi, Ikumi
    Nozaki, Takahiro
    Sakamoto, Ikuko
    BMC SURGERY, 2022, 22 (01)
  • [39] Comparison of transvaginal mesh surgery and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse
    Mayuko Kusuda
    Keiko Kagami
    Ikumi Takahashi
    Takahiro Nozaki
    Ikuko Sakamoto
    BMC Surgery, 22
  • [40] Review The role of synthetic mesh in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse
    Devaseelan, Priscilla
    Fogarty, Paul
    OBSTETRICIAN & GYNAECOLOGIST, 2009, 11 (03)