Comparison of Uphold™ Vaginal Mesh Procedure with Hysterectomy or Uterine Preservation for the Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse

被引:18
作者
Ker, Chin-Ru [1 ]
Lin, Kun-Ling [1 ]
Loo, Zi-Xi [1 ]
Juan, Yung-Shun [2 ]
Long, Cheng-Yu [1 ]
机构
[1] Kaohsiung Med Univ Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
[2] Kaohsiung Med Univ Hosp, Dept Urol, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
来源
SCIENTIFIC REPORTS | 2018年 / 8卷
关键词
SACROSPINOUS HYSTEROPEXY; REPAIR; WOMEN; SACROCOLPOPEXY; SUSPENSION;
D O I
10.1038/s41598-018-27765-8
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Hysterectomy is the empirical treatment for female pelvic organ prolapse (POP) without robust evidence to prove its efficacy. Uphold transvaginal mesh (TVM) system is an innovated device with smaller area, superior anterior/apical support with single incision to treat POP. The prospective cohort study aims to evaluate Uphold TVM's performance with or without concomitant hysterectomy. Inclusion criteria specify patients suffering from stage 2 or more anterior/apical prolapse without previous hysterectomy. Exclusion criteria specify those with contraindications to uterine preservation, such as leiomyomas, adenomyosis, endometrial hyperplasia, abnormal uterine bleeding, postmenopausal bleeding, cervical dysplasia, receiving tamoxifen treatment, family history of gynecology cancer, or colon cancer and incapability to be routinely followed. Thirty patients are recruited in the hysterectomy group and 66 patients in the hysteropexy group. The results demonstrate that patients with Uphold mesh only experience longer vaginal length, shorter operation duration, less blood loss and less post-operation pain. The performance in anatomical correction, lower urinary tract symptoms improvement, de novo dyspareunia, urodynamic study parameters and mesh extrusion rates are comparable with or without uterus preservation. The information is useful in pre-operation counseling, when the patient can make an educated choice whether or not to receive concomitant hysterectomy.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], FDA SAF COMM UPD SER
[2]  
Carramão Silvia, 2009, Rev. Col. Bras. Cir., V36, P65
[3]   Comparison of short-term outcomes following pelvic reconstruction with Perigee and Apogee systems: hysterectomy or not? [J].
Chu, Li-Ching ;
Chuang, Fei-Chi ;
Kung, Fu-Tsai ;
Huang, Kuan-Hui .
INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL, 2012, 23 (01) :79-84
[4]   Transvaginal mesh technique for pelvic organ prolapse repair: mesh exposure management and risk factors [J].
Collinet, Pierre ;
Belot, Franck ;
Debodinance, Philippe ;
Duc, Edouard Ha ;
Lucot, Jean-Philippe ;
Cosson, Michel .
INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL, 2006, 17 (04) :315-320
[5]  
de Oliveira S. A., 2017, INT UROGYNECOL J
[6]   Vaginal reconstructive surgery for severe pelvic organ prolapses: A 'uterine-sparing' technique using polypropylene prostheses [J].
De Vita, D. ;
Araco, F. ;
Gravante, G. ;
Sesti, F. ;
Piccione, E. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2008, 139 (02) :245-251
[7]   Functional outcome after sacrospinous hysteropexy for uterine descensus [J].
Dietz, Viviane ;
Huisman, Marieke ;
de Jong, Joyce M. ;
Heintz, Peter M. ;
van der Vaart, Carl H. .
INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL, 2008, 19 (06) :747-752
[8]   Role of concurrent vaginal hysterectomy in the outcomes of mesh-based vaginal pelvic organ prolapse surgery [J].
Forde, James C. ;
Chughtai, Bilal ;
Anger, Jennifer T. ;
Mao, Jialin ;
Sedrakyan, Art .
INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL, 2017, 28 (08) :1183-1195
[9]   Attitudes Toward Hysterectomy in Women Undergoing Evaluation for Uterovaginal Prolapse [J].
Frick, Anna C. ;
Barber, Matthew D. ;
Paraiso, Marie Fidela R. ;
Ridgeway, Beri ;
Jelovsek, John Eric ;
Walters, Mark D. .
FEMALE PELVIC MEDICINE AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2013, 19 (02) :103-109
[10]   Risk of unanticipated abnormal gynecologic pathology at the time of hysterectomy for uterovaginal prolapse [J].
Frick, Anna C. ;
Walters, Mark D. ;
Larkin, Kathleen S. ;
Barber, Matthew D. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2010, 202 (05) :507.e1-507.e4