A clinical study on the trocar-guided mesh repair system for pelvic organ prolapse surgery
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
ObjectiveTo evaluate the complication and recurrence rates in patients undergoing trocar-guided mesh implant for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) treatment. MethodsA retrospective study was performed based on the medical records of patients who had undergone mesh implant by one surgeon from May 2006 to August 2013 at the Presbyterian Medical Center in Korea. We evaluated perioperative complications such as bladder injury, mesh exposure, urinary symptoms, infections, and chronic pelvic pain. Recurrence was defined as a POP-quantification system stage ≥II or any symptomatic prolapse. ResultsSixty-seven patients were evaluated, and the mean age of patients was 65.4±7.2 years. Stage ≥III POP-quantification Ba was noted in 61 patients (91%). Intraoperative complications included three cases of bladder injury (4.5%). The mean follow-up period was 44.1±7.9 months. Postoperative complications occurred in seven women (10.5%): four cases of urinary symptoms (6%), two cases of infections (3%), and one case of chronic pelvic pain (1.5%). Mesh exposure did not occur (0%). Prolapse recurrence was reported in five patients (7.5%). ConclusionBased on our operational result, the trocar-guided mesh implant seems to provide safe and effective outcomes.
Abstract
ObjectiveTo evaluate the complication and recurrence rates in patients undergoing trocar-guided mesh implant for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) treatment. MethodsA retrospective study was performed based on the medical records of patients who had undergone mesh implant by one surgeon from May 2006 to August 2013 at the Presbyterian Medical Center in Korea. We evaluated perioperative complications such as bladder injury, mesh exposure, urinary symptoms, infections, and chronic pelvic pain. Recurrence was defined as a POP-quantification system stage ≥II or any symptomatic prolapse. ResultsSixty-seven patients were evaluated, and the mean age of patients was 65.4±7.2 years. Stage ≥III POP-quantification Ba was noted in 61 patients (91%). Intraoperative complications included three cases of bladder injury (4.5%). The mean follow-up period was 44.1±7.9 months. Postoperative complications occurred in seven women (10.5%): four cases of urinary symptoms (6%), two cases of infections (3%), and one case of chronic pelvic pain (1.5%). Mesh exposure did not occur (0%). Prolapse recurrence was reported in five patients (7.5%). ConclusionBased on our operational result, the trocar-guided mesh implant seems to provide safe and effective outcomes.
참고문헌 (30)
- Wiener JM, "Population ageing in the United States of America : implications for public programmes", Int J Epidemiol, 31, pp.776~781 (2002)
- Nygaard I, "Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women", JAMA, 300, pp.1311~1316 (2008)
- Jelovsek JE, "Pelvic organ prolapse", Lancet, 369, pp.1027~1038 (2007)
- Olsen AL, "Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence", Obstet Gynecol, 89, pp.501~506 (1997)
- Mechanic D, "The changing elderly population and future health care needs", J Urban Health, 76, pp.24~38 (1999)
- van Raalte H, "Prolift : an innovative delivery system for transvaginal placement of synthetic grafts for the repair of pelvic organ prolapsed", J Pelvic Med Surg, 13, pp.351~360 (2007)
- van Raalte HM, "One-year anatomic and quality-of-life outcomes after the Prolift procedure for treatment of posthysterectomy prolapse", Am J Obstet Gynecol, 199, pp.694.e1~694.e6 (2008)
- Jambusaria LH, "One-year functional and anatomic outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy versus vaginal extraperitoneal colpopexy with mesh", Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg, 21, pp.87~92 (2015)
- Persu C, "Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System(POP-Q) : a new era in pelvic prolapse staging", J Med Life, 4, pp.75~81 (2011)
- Ouzaid I, "Transvaginal repair of genital prolapse using the Prolift technique : a prospective study", Prog Urol, 20, pp.578~583 (2010)
- "Update on serious complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapsed: FDA-Safety Communication" (2011)[URL]
- Marschke J, "Transvaginal single-incision mesh reconstruction for recurrent or advanced anterior vaginal wall prolapse", Arch Gynecol Obstet, 291, pp.1081~1087 (2015)
- Altman D, "Anterior colporrhaphy versus transvaginal mesh for pelvic-organ prolapse", N Engl J Med, 364, pp.1826~1836 (2011)
- Maher CM, "Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women: the updated summary version Cochrane review", Int Urogynecol J, 22, pp.1445~1457 (2011)
- Moore RD, "Single-incision vaginal approach to treat cystocele and vault prolapse with an anterior wall mesh anchored apically to the sacrospinous ligaments", Int Urogynecol J, 23, pp.85~91 (2012)
- Peterson TV, "Primary versus recurrent prolapse surgery : differences in outcomes", Int Urogynecol J, 21, pp.483~488 (2010)
- Maher C, "Surgical management of anterior vaginal wall prolapse : an evidencebased literature review", Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct, 17, pp.195~201 (2006)
- Miedel A, "A 5-year prospective follow-up study of vaginal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse", Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct, 19, pp.1593~1601 (2008)
- Kozal S, "Morbidity and functional mid-term outcomes using Prolift pelvic floor repair systems", Can Urol Assoc J, 8, pp.E605~E609 (2014)
- Judd JP, "Cost-minimization analysis of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal sacrocolpopexy", J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 17, pp.493~499 (2010)
- Halaska M, "A multicenter, randomized, prospective, controlled study comparing sacrospinous fixation and transvaginal mesh in the treatment of posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse", Am J Obstet Gynecol, 207, pp.301.e1~301.e7 (2012)
- Vollebregt A, "Primary surgical repair of anterior vaginal prolapse: a randomised trial comparing anatomical and functional outcome between anterior colporrhaphy and trocar-guided transobturator anterior mesh", BJOG, 118, pp.1518~1527 (2011)
- El-Khawand D, "Risk factors for vaginal mesh exposure after mesh-augmented anterior repair : a retrospective cohort study", Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg, 20, pp.305~309 (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)
- Kasyan G, "Mesh-related and intraoperative complications of pelvic organ prolapse repair", Cent European J Urol, 67, pp.296~301 (2014)
- Nussler E, "Operation for primary cystocele with anterior colporrhaphy or nonabsorbable mesh : patient-reported outcomes", Int Urogynecol J, 26, pp.359~366 (2015)
- Papcun P, "Long term follow-up of the patients with pelvic organ prolapse after the mesh implantation using strict indication criteria", Bratisl Lek Listy, 115, pp.287~291 (2014)
- Stepanian AA, "Risk of mesh extrusion and other mesh-related complications after laparoscopic sacral colpopexy with or without concurrent laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy : experience of 402 patients", J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 15, pp.188~196 (2008)
- De Ridder D., "Should we use meshes in the management of vaginal prolapse?", Curr Opin Urol, 18, pp.377~382 (2008)
- Firoozi F, "Purely transvaginal", perineal management of complications from commercial prolapse kits using a new prostheses, J Urol, pp.2012, 187[DOI]