Abdominal sacrocolpopexy--standardized surgical technique, perioperative management and outcome in women with posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse.

Gynakologisch-geburtshilfliche Rundschau Pub Date : 2009-01-01 Epub Date: 2010-05-19 DOI:10.1159/000301101
Markus Huebner, Marc Krzonkalla, Ralf Tunn
{"title":"Abdominal sacrocolpopexy--standardized surgical technique, perioperative management and outcome in women with posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse.","authors":"Markus Huebner,&nbsp;Marc Krzonkalla,&nbsp;Ralf Tunn","doi":"10.1159/000301101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To provide a detailed description of abdominal sacrocolpopexy and to present a retrospective evaluation of the outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>78 patients underwent sacrocolpopexy between January 2004 and July 2006; 72% had concomitant procedures; 53 patients participated in the follow-up. Anatomical success was defined as any leading point of the vaginal wall remaining >1 cm above the hymen. Failures were split into 3 groups: (1) asymptomatic, no further treatment; (2) symptomatic, conservative treatment; (3) symptomatic, requiring repeat surgery. The key points of the surgical technique were standardized mesh shape, reasonable choice of fixation of the mesh to the anterior and posterior vaginal walls as well as to the longitudinal ligament at S(2), and short operating time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Standardization kept the mean operating time short (72.7 +/- 14.5 min for sacrocolpopexy only, 86.4 +/- 21.0 min if combined with the Burch procedure; p = 0.03). At the follow-up, none of the 53 patients (100%) presented with a recurrent apical prolapse; 17% (n = 9) had stage II anterior wall prolapse, and 69.8% (n = 37) did not show symptoms specific to anterior wall prolapse. Regarding the posterior compartment, 38% (n = 20) had stage II and 1 stage III posterior wall prolapse; 86.8% (n = 46) did not show symptoms specific to posterior wall prolapse. Questionnaire items showed improvement of quality of life. Nine patients required reinterventions: suburethral sling (3), excision due to erosion (2), anterior (1) and posterior (1) repair, stapled transanal rectal resection (1), botulinum toxin injection (1). Every fourth woman presented with symptoms requiring further treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Sacrocolpopexy is a valid technique to treat apical and anterior vaginal wall prolapse.</p>","PeriodicalId":12827,"journal":{"name":"Gynakologisch-geburtshilfliche Rundschau","volume":"49 4","pages":"308-14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000301101","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gynakologisch-geburtshilfliche Rundschau","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000301101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2010/5/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Aims: To provide a detailed description of abdominal sacrocolpopexy and to present a retrospective evaluation of the outcomes.

Methods: 78 patients underwent sacrocolpopexy between January 2004 and July 2006; 72% had concomitant procedures; 53 patients participated in the follow-up. Anatomical success was defined as any leading point of the vaginal wall remaining >1 cm above the hymen. Failures were split into 3 groups: (1) asymptomatic, no further treatment; (2) symptomatic, conservative treatment; (3) symptomatic, requiring repeat surgery. The key points of the surgical technique were standardized mesh shape, reasonable choice of fixation of the mesh to the anterior and posterior vaginal walls as well as to the longitudinal ligament at S(2), and short operating time.

Results: Standardization kept the mean operating time short (72.7 +/- 14.5 min for sacrocolpopexy only, 86.4 +/- 21.0 min if combined with the Burch procedure; p = 0.03). At the follow-up, none of the 53 patients (100%) presented with a recurrent apical prolapse; 17% (n = 9) had stage II anterior wall prolapse, and 69.8% (n = 37) did not show symptoms specific to anterior wall prolapse. Regarding the posterior compartment, 38% (n = 20) had stage II and 1 stage III posterior wall prolapse; 86.8% (n = 46) did not show symptoms specific to posterior wall prolapse. Questionnaire items showed improvement of quality of life. Nine patients required reinterventions: suburethral sling (3), excision due to erosion (2), anterior (1) and posterior (1) repair, stapled transanal rectal resection (1), botulinum toxin injection (1). Every fourth woman presented with symptoms requiring further treatment.

Conclusions: Sacrocolpopexy is a valid technique to treat apical and anterior vaginal wall prolapse.

腹部骶colpop固定术——标准手术技术、围手术期处理和绝经后阴道穹窿脱垂患者的预后
目的:提供腹部骶colpopacy的详细描述,并对结果进行回顾性评估。方法:2004年1月至2006年7月行骶骶固定术的患者78例;72%接受了伴随手术;53例患者参加了随访。解剖学上的成功定义为阴道壁在处女膜上方超过1cm的任何起始点。失败患者分为3组:(1)无症状,无进一步治疗;(2)对症保守治疗;(3)有症状,需要重复手术。手术技术的关键是规范网片形状,合理选择网片与阴道前后壁及S(2)处纵韧带的固定方式,缩短手术时间。结果:标准化使平均手术时间缩短(仅骶colpop固定术72.7 +/- 14.5 min,联合Burch手术86.4 +/- 21.0 min;P = 0.03)。在随访中,53例患者(100%)均无复发性根尖脱垂;17% (n = 9)有II期前壁脱垂,69.8% (n = 37)没有前壁脱垂特有的症状。对于后腔室,38% (n = 20)发生II期,1例发生III期后壁脱垂;86.8% (n = 46)未出现后壁脱垂的特异性症状。问卷项目显示生活质量的改善。9例患者需要再次介入治疗:喉下悬吊(3例),因糜烂切除(2例),前(1例)和后(1例)修复,经肛直肠吻合术(1例),肉毒杆菌毒素注射(1例)。每4例患者中有1例出现需要进一步治疗的症状。结论:骶colpop固定术是治疗阴道根尖及前壁脱垂的有效方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信