Feldner Paulo Cezar, Castro Rodrigo Aquino, Cipolotti Luiz Antonio, Delroy Carlos Antonio, Sartori Marair Gracio Ferreira, Girão Manoel João Batista Castello
Section of Urogynecology and Pelvic Surgery, Department of Gynecology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Rua dos Otonis, 601 (Vila Clementino), 04025-001, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Int Urogynecol J. 2010 Sep;21(9):1057-63. doi: 10.1007/s00192-010-1163-8. Epub 2010 Apr 29.
This study seeks to compare the small intestine submucosa (SIS) graft with traditional colporrhaphy (TC) for surgical treatment of anterior vaginal prolapse.
Subjects were randomly assigned to SIS (n = 29) or to TC (n = 27) preoperatively and outcomes analyzed at 12 months postoperatively. The primary outcome was the absence of POP-Q stage >or= II prolapse, and secondary outcome was improvement in quality of life. Data were compared with independent samples or paired Student's t test.
SIS group had 86.2% anatomic cure compared to 59.3% in TC (p = 0.03). SIS improved point Ba measurement significantly (-1.93 cm versus -1.37 cm, p = 0.02). Both operations significantly improved quality of life, although there were no differences between the groups. We observed a greater number of complications in the SIS group, with no infections or erosion.
SIS repair improved point Ba significantly. However, there were no differences observed in quality of life between the techniques.
本研究旨在比较小肠黏膜下层（SIS）移植术与传统阴道修补术（TC）治疗阴道前壁脱垂的效果。
术前将受试者随机分为SIS组（n = 29）或TC组（n = 27），术后12个月分析结果。主要结局是无POP-Q分期≥II度脱垂，次要结局是生活质量改善。数据采用独立样本或配对t检验进行比较。
SIS组的解剖学治愈率为86.2%，而TC组为59.3%（p = 0.03）。SIS组显著改善了Ba点测量值（-1.93 cm对-1.37 cm，p = 0.02）。两种手术均显著改善了生活质量，尽管两组之间无差异。我们观察到SIS组的并发症较多，但无感染或侵蚀。
SIS修复术显著改善了Ba点。然而，两种技术在生活质量方面未观察到差异。
