A Comparison of Different Pelvic Reconstruction Surgeries Using Mesh for Pelvic Organ Prolapse Patients
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
초록
Abstract
This study was carried out in order to compare the effects in different surgeries using mesh in pelvic organ prolapse patients whose leading points were C. Thirty-nine patients were categorized into 3 groups: group A pelvic reconstruction with hysterectomy; group B hysterectomy prior to pelvic reconstruction; and group C pelvic reconstruction with uterus preserved. At first visit, POP-Q stage was determined, and age, BMI, admission days, operation time, post-operative stage and complications were observed and results were analyzed and compared. All patients who were operated upon converted to stage one month following the operation, and no further change was observed except in one patient. Group admission days were not significantly different, but tended to be lower in group C. Group average operation times between ‘group A and B’ and ‘group A and C’ were statistically different. No significant difference was observed in post-operative complications between the groups, but 3 members of group A developed erosion, whereas no erosion occurred in groups B and C. Pelvic reconstruction using mesh is a highly efficient method of treating pelvic organ prolapse. Improvements in stage and post-operative complications were not significantly different in the groups. However, uteropexy showed a shorter operation time, fewer admission days, and less erosion due to mesh than conventional pelvic reconstruction with hysterectomy.
참고문헌 (19)
- "Clinical evaluation of Pelvic Organ Prolapse", 1, pp.66~71 (1999)
- "Colposacropexy with Gore-Tex mesh in marked vaginal and uterovaginal prolapse", 34, pp.111~7 (1998)
- "Principles and practice of clinical gynecology", pp.677~85 (1983)
- "Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence", 89, pp.501~6 (1997)
- "Non-surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence", 1, pp.72~7 (1999)
- "Diagnosis and Management by Albert Altcheck Liane Deligdirch", pp.368~87 (1991), Springer-verlag
- "Cox DW", am j obstet gynecol 1990, pp.162~
- "Longterm followup of posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse abdominal repair A Report of 85 cases", 195, pp.352~8 (2002)
- "The role of synthetic and biological prostheses in reconstructive pelvic floor surgery", 14, pp.527~35 (2002)
- "Sacrohysteropexy with synthetic mesh for management of uterovaginal prolapse", 108, pp.629~33 (2001)
- "The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction", 175, pp.10~7 (1996)
- "Preoperative and postoperative analysis of site-specific pelvic support defects in 81 women treated with sacrospinous ligament suspension and pelvic reconstruction", pp.1764~71
- "Nonsurgical management of genital prolapse. A review and recommendations for clinical practice", 45, pp.789~97 (2000)
- "Non-surgical treatment of uterovaginal prolapse using double vaginal rings", 108, pp.112~3 (2001)
- "Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse", pp.885~8
- "a retrospective study of a clinician's experience", pp.518~22
- "Abdominal sacral colpopexy for posthysterectomy vaginal vault descendus", 1, pp.18~25 (1995)
- "Mesh erosion after abdominal sacrocolpopexy", 92, pp.999~1004 (1998)
- "Synthetic sling for genital prolapse in young women", 57, pp.57~64 (1997)
