مورد إلكتروني
Long-term outcomes of pelvic organ prolapse repair using a mesh-capturing device when comparing single- versus multicenter use
| العنوان: | Long-term outcomes of pelvic organ prolapse repair using a mesh-capturing device when comparing single- versus multicenter use |
|---|---|
| بيانات النشر: | Uppsala universitet, Reproduktiv hälsa Karolinska Inst, Danderyd Hosp, Dept Clin Sci, S-17177 Stockholm, Sweden.;Danderyd Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, S-18288 Stockholm, Sweden. Karolinska Inst, Danderyd Hosp, Dept Clin Sci, S-17177 Stockholm, Sweden.;Danderyd Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, S-18288 Stockholm, Sweden. Univ Helsinki, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Helsinki, Finland.;Helsinki Univ Hosp, Helsinki, Finland. Univ Helsinki, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Helsinki, Finland.;Helsinki Univ Hosp, Helsinki, Finland.;Helsinki Univ Cent Hosp, Folkhalsan Res Ctr, Helsinki, Finland. Karolinska Inst, Danderyd Hosp, Dept Clin Sci, S-17177 Stockholm, Sweden.;Danderyd Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, S-18288 Stockholm, Sweden. SPRINGER HEIDELBERG 2021 |
| تفاصيل مُضافة: | Falconer, Christian Altman, Daniel Poutakidis, Georgios Rahkola-Soisalo, Päivi Mikkola, Tomi Morcos, Edward |
| نوع الوثيقة: | Electronic Resource |
| مستخلص: | Purpose The aim of this study was to compare long-term effects of high-volume surgery at a single-center to multicenter use when using a mesh-capturing device for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair. Methods Five years after surgery 101 (88%) at the single center were compared with 164 (81.2%) in the multicenter trial. Outcome measurements included clinical examination, prolapse-specific symptom questionnaires [Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 (PFDI-20), Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-short form (PFIQ-7), Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12)] and pain estimation by VAS (0-10). Results Optimal apical segment outcome was 95% in the single- compared to 83.3% in the multicenter study (p < 0.001). POP recurrence in the anterior and posterior walls (POP-Q, Ba and Bp >= 0) was more common at the multicenter as compared to the single center [(19.8% vs 5.4%) and (26% vs 2.7%), (p < 0.001)]. Reoperations for POP and mesh-related complications were more frequent in the multicenter study [31/202 (15.3%) vs 7/116 (6.1%),p < 0.001]. Total PFDI-20, PFIQ-7 and PISQ-12 scores were comparable between the cohorts. There were no significant differences in overall pain scores in-between the cohorts during follow-up. At the single center, 1/81 patients (1.2%) had VAS 7/10, i.e. severe pain, as compared to 3/131 (2.3%) in the multicenter study (p = 0.277). Conclusions Despite the high objective and subjective long-term effectiveness of the procedure in both regular use, and at a high-volume center, centralizing the use of a standardized capturing-device guided transvaginal mesh for POP repair reduced secondary interventions by more than half. |
| مصطلحات الفهرس: | Pelvic organ prolapse, Transvaginal mesh, Surgical volume, Safety, Effectiveness, Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine, Reproduktionsmedicin och gynekologi, Article in journal, info:eu-repo/semantics/article, text |
| DOI: | 10.1007.s00404-020-05764-3 |
| URL: | Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 0932-0067, 2021, 303:1, s. 135-142 |
| الإتاحة: | Open access content. Open access content info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| ملاحظة: | application/pdf English |
| أرقام أخرى: | UPE oai:DiVA.org:uu-439168 0000-0001-7512-4823 0000-0003-2049-088X doi:10.1007/s00404-020-05764-3 PMID 32915305 ISI:000569028500002 1244128368 |
| المصدر المساهم: | UPPSALA UNIV LIBR From OAIster®, provided by the OCLC Cooperative. |
| رقم الأكسشن: | edsoai.on1244128368 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | OAIster |
| DOI: | 10.1007.s00404-020-05764-3 |
|---|