阴道松弛与阴道胎次和分娩方式有关吗?

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
International Urogynecology Journal Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-13 DOI:10.1007/s00192-024-05849-6
Susana Mustafa-Mikhail, Moshe Gillor, Yara Nakhleh Francis, Hans Peter Dietz
{"title":"阴道松弛与阴道胎次和分娩方式有关吗?","authors":"Susana Mustafa-Mikhail, Moshe Gillor, Yara Nakhleh Francis, Hans Peter Dietz","doi":"10.1007/s00192-024-05849-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction and hypothesis: </strong>Vaginal laxity (VL) is a common symptom of pelvic floor dysfunction. Although VL has become a frequent topic for research in the last decade, its pathogenesis is still not well understood. The objective was to determine whether vaginal parity or mode of delivery is associated with vaginal laxity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective observational study involving women seen in a tertiary urogynecology clinic between May 2016 and November 2018 with symptoms of pelvic floor dysfunction. Patients underwent a standardized interview, clinical examination (POP-Q), and four-dimensional (4D) pelvic floor ultrasound (PFUS). Data regarding vaginal parity and the mode of delivery were based on patient-reported information. Archived 4D-PFUS volumes were analyzed offline to evaluate levator hiatal area on Valsalva.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from 1,051 patients were analyzed. VL was reported by 236 women (23%) who were younger on average (mean age 54 vs 59 years, p < 0.001) and less likely to be menopausal (530 out of 815 [65.0%] vs.129 out of 236 [54.7%]), p = 0.004]. Symptoms of prolapse were much more common in the VL group (214 out of 236 [91%] vs 316 out of 815 [39%], p =  < 0.001) and on imaging mean levator hiatal area (HA) on Valsalva was larger (31 vs 26 cm<sup>2</sup>, p = 0.01). Vaginal parity was associated with VL symptoms (235 out of 236 [99%] vs 767 out of 815 [94%], p = 0.008), but neither VL prevalence nor bother increased with higher parity. Women who delivered vaginally were three times more likely to complain of VL than those who delivered only by cesarean section.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Vaginal laxity was found to be more prevalent in vaginally parous women. This effect seems to be largely attributable to the first delivery. Instrumental delivery was not shown to increase association with VL compared with normal vaginal delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":14355,"journal":{"name":"International Urogynecology Journal","volume":" ","pages":"2323-2328"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11732910/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is Vaginal Laxity Associated with Vaginal Parity and Mode of Delivery?\",\"authors\":\"Susana Mustafa-Mikhail, Moshe Gillor, Yara Nakhleh Francis, Hans Peter Dietz\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00192-024-05849-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction and hypothesis: </strong>Vaginal laxity (VL) is a common symptom of pelvic floor dysfunction. Although VL has become a frequent topic for research in the last decade, its pathogenesis is still not well understood. The objective was to determine whether vaginal parity or mode of delivery is associated with vaginal laxity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective observational study involving women seen in a tertiary urogynecology clinic between May 2016 and November 2018 with symptoms of pelvic floor dysfunction. Patients underwent a standardized interview, clinical examination (POP-Q), and four-dimensional (4D) pelvic floor ultrasound (PFUS). Data regarding vaginal parity and the mode of delivery were based on patient-reported information. Archived 4D-PFUS volumes were analyzed offline to evaluate levator hiatal area on Valsalva.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from 1,051 patients were analyzed. VL was reported by 236 women (23%) who were younger on average (mean age 54 vs 59 years, p < 0.001) and less likely to be menopausal (530 out of 815 [65.0%] vs.129 out of 236 [54.7%]), p = 0.004]. Symptoms of prolapse were much more common in the VL group (214 out of 236 [91%] vs 316 out of 815 [39%], p =  < 0.001) and on imaging mean levator hiatal area (HA) on Valsalva was larger (31 vs 26 cm<sup>2</sup>, p = 0.01). Vaginal parity was associated with VL symptoms (235 out of 236 [99%] vs 767 out of 815 [94%], p = 0.008), but neither VL prevalence nor bother increased with higher parity. Women who delivered vaginally were three times more likely to complain of VL than those who delivered only by cesarean section.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Vaginal laxity was found to be more prevalent in vaginally parous women. This effect seems to be largely attributable to the first delivery. Instrumental delivery was not shown to increase association with VL compared with normal vaginal delivery.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14355,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Urogynecology Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2323-2328\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11732910/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Urogynecology Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-024-05849-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urogynecology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-024-05849-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言和假设:阴道松弛(VL)是盆底功能障碍的常见症状。尽管近十年来阴道松弛已成为研究的热门话题,但对其发病机制仍不甚了解。本研究旨在确定阴道奇偶性或分娩方式是否与阴道松弛有关:这是一项回顾性观察研究,涉及2016年5月至2018年11月期间在一家三级泌尿妇科诊所就诊、有盆底功能障碍症状的女性。患者接受了标准化访谈、临床检查(POP-Q)和四维盆底超声检查(PFUS)。有关阴道奇偶性和分娩方式的数据基于患者报告的信息。对存档的 4D-PFUS 容量进行离线分析,以评估 Valsalva 上的左侧裂孔面积:结果:分析了 1,051 名患者的数据。236名女性(23%)报告了VL,她们平均年龄较小(平均年龄54岁对59岁,P 2,P = 0.01)。阴道分娩与 VL 症状有关(236 例中的 235 例 [99%] 与 815 例中的 767 例 [94%],P = 0.008),但 VL 患病率和困扰均未随分娩次数的增加而增加。经阴道分娩的妇女抱怨阴道松弛的几率是剖宫产妇女的三倍:结论:阴道松弛在经阴道分娩的准妈妈中更为普遍。结论:阴道松弛在经阴道顺产的产妇中更为普遍,这种影响似乎主要归因于首次分娩。与正常阴道分娩相比,器械助产并未显示会增加阴道松弛的相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Is Vaginal Laxity Associated with Vaginal Parity and Mode of Delivery?

Introduction and hypothesis: Vaginal laxity (VL) is a common symptom of pelvic floor dysfunction. Although VL has become a frequent topic for research in the last decade, its pathogenesis is still not well understood. The objective was to determine whether vaginal parity or mode of delivery is associated with vaginal laxity.

Methods: This was a retrospective observational study involving women seen in a tertiary urogynecology clinic between May 2016 and November 2018 with symptoms of pelvic floor dysfunction. Patients underwent a standardized interview, clinical examination (POP-Q), and four-dimensional (4D) pelvic floor ultrasound (PFUS). Data regarding vaginal parity and the mode of delivery were based on patient-reported information. Archived 4D-PFUS volumes were analyzed offline to evaluate levator hiatal area on Valsalva.

Results: Data from 1,051 patients were analyzed. VL was reported by 236 women (23%) who were younger on average (mean age 54 vs 59 years, p < 0.001) and less likely to be menopausal (530 out of 815 [65.0%] vs.129 out of 236 [54.7%]), p = 0.004]. Symptoms of prolapse were much more common in the VL group (214 out of 236 [91%] vs 316 out of 815 [39%], p =  < 0.001) and on imaging mean levator hiatal area (HA) on Valsalva was larger (31 vs 26 cm2, p = 0.01). Vaginal parity was associated with VL symptoms (235 out of 236 [99%] vs 767 out of 815 [94%], p = 0.008), but neither VL prevalence nor bother increased with higher parity. Women who delivered vaginally were three times more likely to complain of VL than those who delivered only by cesarean section.

Conclusions: Vaginal laxity was found to be more prevalent in vaginally parous women. This effect seems to be largely attributable to the first delivery. Instrumental delivery was not shown to increase association with VL compared with normal vaginal delivery.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
22.20%
发文量
406
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Urogynecology Journal is the official journal of the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA).The International Urogynecology Journal has evolved in response to a perceived need amongst the clinicians, scientists, and researchers active in the field of urogynecology and pelvic floor disorders. Gynecologists, urologists, physiotherapists, nurses and basic scientists require regular means of communication within this field of pelvic floor dysfunction to express new ideas and research, and to review clinical practice in the diagnosis and treatment of women with disorders of the pelvic floor. This Journal has adopted the peer review process for all original contributions and will maintain high standards with regard to the research published therein. The clinical approach to urogynecology and pelvic floor disorders will be emphasized with each issue containing clinically relevant material that will be immediately applicable for clinical medicine. This publication covers all aspects of the field in an interdisciplinary fashion
×
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