Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy Plus Colporrhaphy With an Small Intestine Submucosa Graft Versus Total Pelvic Floor Reconstruction for Advanced Prolapse: A Retrospective Cohort Study
1
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: Transvaginal mesh (TVM) results in a greater anatomic cure but more complications. We aimed to compare laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) plus colporrhaphy with the small intestine submucosa (SIS) graft versus TVM for advanced pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Methods: Patients with advanced POP who underwent LSC plus colporrhaphy with the SIS graft or TVM at a center between September 2015 and November 2016 were studied. Anatomical outcomes were evaluated using POP quantification. Functional outcomes related to POP and sexual life were evaluated using the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12). Data regarding surgical procedures and patient demographic variables were recorded. Chi-square and Student t -tests were used for 2 independent samples. Results: A total of 76 patients were enrolled in this study with 26 patients in the LSC plus colporrhaphy with the SIS graft group (group A) and 50 patients with TVM group (group B). All patients in both groups demonstrated significant improvement in anatomical outcomes (P<0.05) after surgery. PFDI-20 scores were significantly improved 12 months after operation in both groups (P<0.001). PISQ-12 scores were significantly improved in patients after surgery, especially patients in group A (P<0.001). Mesh exposure occurred in both groups as follows: 8 patients (30.7%) in group A and 5 patients (10%) in group B. Conclusions: Even though both surgeries showed excellent results for subjective and objective outcomes, the use of an SIS graft might increase the exposure of polypropylene mesh. We do not recommend LSC plus colporrhaphy with the SIS graft for advanced multiple-compartments prolapse.
Abstract
Purpose: Transvaginal mesh (TVM) results in a greater anatomic cure but more complications. We aimed to compare laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) plus colporrhaphy with the small intestine submucosa (SIS) graft versus TVM for advanced pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Methods: Patients with advanced POP who underwent LSC plus colporrhaphy with the SIS graft or TVM at a center between September 2015 and November 2016 were studied. Anatomical outcomes were evaluated using POP quantification. Functional outcomes related to POP and sexual life were evaluated using the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12). Data regarding surgical procedures and patient demographic variables were recorded. Chi-square and Student t -tests were used for 2 independent samples. Results: A total of 76 patients were enrolled in this study with 26 patients in the LSC plus colporrhaphy with the SIS graft group (group A) and 50 patients with TVM group (group B). All patients in both groups demonstrated significant improvement in anatomical outcomes (P<0.05) after surgery. PFDI-20 scores were significantly improved 12 months after operation in both groups (P<0.001). PISQ-12 scores were significantly improved in patients after surgery, especially patients in group A (P<0.001). Mesh exposure occurred in both groups as follows: 8 patients (30.7%) in group A and 5 patients (10%) in group B. Conclusions: Even though both surgeries showed excellent results for subjective and objective outcomes, the use of an SIS graft might increase the exposure of polypropylene mesh. We do not recommend LSC plus colporrhaphy with the SIS graft for advanced multiple-compartments prolapse.
참고문헌 (22)
- Barber MD, "Epidemiology and outcome assessment of pelvic organ prolapse", Int Urogynecol J, 24, pp.1783~1790 (2013)
- Swift S, "Pelvic Organ Support Study(POSST) : the distribution, clinical definition, and epidemiologic condition of pelvic organ support defects", Am J Obstet Gynecol, 192, pp.795~806 (2005)
- Wilkins MF, "Epidemiology of pelvic organ prolapse", Curr Obstet Gynecol Rep, 5, pp.119~123 (2016)
- Elterman DS, "Changes in pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the last decade among United States urologists", J Urol, 191, pp.1022~1027 (2014)
- Altman D, "Anterior colporrhaphy versus transvaginal mesh for pelvic-organ prolapse", N Engl J Med, 364, pp.1826~1836 (2011)
- Kasyan G, "Meshrelated and intraoperative complications of pelvic organ prolapse repair", Cent European J Urol, 67, pp.296~301 (2014)
- Murphy M, "Time to rethink : an evidence-based response from pelvic surgeons to the FDA Safety Communication : "UPDATE on Serious Complications Associated with Transvaginal Placement of Surgical Mesh for Pelvic Organ Prolapse"", Int Urogynecol J, 23, pp.5~9 (2012)
- Feldner PC Jr, "Anterior vaginal wall prolapse : a randomized controlled trial of SIS graft versus traditional colporrhaphy", Int Urogynecol J, 21, pp.1057~1063 (2010)
- Culligan PJ, "Porcine dermis compared with polypropylene mesh for laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy : a randomized controlled trial", Obstet Gynecol, 121, pp.143~151 (2013)
- Liang X, "Treatment of total pelvic organ prolapse using a whole biological patch : A pilot study of 17 patients", J Obstet Gynaecol Res, 43, pp.164~172 (2017)
- Haylen BT, "International Urogynecological Association(IUGA)", International Continence Society(ICS)joint terminology and classification of the complications related to native tissue female pelvic floor surgery, 2012, pp.31, 406~414
- Agha RA, "The STROCSS statement : Strengthening the Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery", Int J Surg, 46, pp.198~202 (2017)
- Zhu L, "Validation of the Chinese version of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse", Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire short form(PISQ-12), 2012, pp.116, 117~119
- Barber MD, "Short forms of two conditionspecific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders(PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7)", Am J Obstet Gynecol, 193, pp.103~113 (2005)
- Chen Y, "Medium-term outcomes of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy or sacrohysteropexy versus vaginal sacrospinous ligament fixation for middle compartment prolapse", Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 137, pp.164~169 (2017)
- Zhu L, "Pelvic reconstruction with mesh for advanced pelvic organ prolapse : a new economic surgical method", Menopause, 18, pp.328~332 (2011)
- Siddiqui NY, "Mesh sacrocolpopexy compared with native tissue vaginal repair : a systematic review and meta-analysis", Obstet Gynecol, 125, pp.44~55 (2015)
- Schimpf MO, "Graft and mesh use in transvaginal prolapse repair : a systematic review", Obstet Gynecol, 128, pp.81~91 (2016)
- Balzarro M, "Long-term follow-up of anterior vaginal repair : a comparison among colporrhaphy, colporrhaphy with reinforcement by xenograft, and mesh", Neurourol Urodyn, 37, pp.278~283 (2018)
- Lo TS, "Anterior-apical single-incision mesh surgery(SIMS) : surgical and functional outcomes at 1 year", J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 22, pp.50~56 (2015)
- Schiavi MC, "Severe pelvic organ prolapse treated by vaginal native tissue repair : long-term analysis of outcomes in 146 patients", Arch Gynecol Obstet, 295, pp.917~922 (2017)
- Cheng YW, "Risk factors and management of vaginal mesh erosion after pelvic organ prolapse surgery", Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol, 56, pp.184~187 (2017)