导致尿道中段吊带翻修术的危险因素：一项多中心病例对照研究。
Risk factors leading to midurethral sling revision: a multicenter case-control study.
作者信息
Molden Stephanie, Patterson Danielle, Tarr Megan, Sanses Tatiana, Bracken Jessica, Nguyen Aimee, Harvie Heide S, White Amanda, Hammil Sarah A, Murphy Miles, Rogers Rebecca G
机构信息
The Institute for Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery, Allentown, PA, USA.
出版信息
Int Urogynecol J. 2010 Oct;21(10):1253-9. doi: 10.1007/s00192-010-1186-1. Epub 2010 Jun 15.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS
To determine risk factors for sling revision after midurethral sling (MUS) placement.
METHODS
This multicenter case-control study included patients who underwent MUS placement and subsequent revision secondary to voiding dysfunction from January 1999-2007 from nine Urogynecology centers across the USA. Direct logistic regression analysis was used to determine which diagnostic variables predicted sling revision.
RESULTS
Of the patients, 197 met the study criteria. Patient demographics, urodynamic findings, and operative differences did not increase the risk for sling revision. Risk factors for sling revision did include: pre-existing voiding symptoms (OR 2.76, 95% CI 1.32-5.79; p = 0.004) retropubic sling type (OR = 2.28, 95% CI 1.08-4.78; p = 0.04) and concurrent surgery (OR = 4.88, 95% CI 2.16-11.05; p < 0.001)
CONCLUSIONS
This study determined that pre-existing obstructive voiding symptoms, retropubic sling type, and concurrent surgery at the time of sling placement are risk factors for sling revision.
引言与假设
确定经尿道中段吊带术（MUS）置入后吊带修复的危险因素。
方法
这项多中心病例对照研究纳入了1999年1月至2007年期间在美国9个泌尿妇科中心接受MUS置入术及随后因排尿功能障碍而进行修复的患者。采用直接逻辑回归分析来确定哪些诊断变量可预测吊带修复。
结果
患者中，197例符合研究标准。患者的人口统计学特征、尿动力学检查结果及手术差异并未增加吊带修复的风险。吊带修复的危险因素包括：既往存在的排尿症状（比值比[OR]2.76，95%可信区间[CI]1.32 - 5.79；p = 0.004）、耻骨后吊带类型（OR = 2.28，95% CI 1.08 - 4.78；p = 0.04）以及同期手术（OR = 4.88，95% CI 2.16 - 11.05；p < 0.001）
结论
本研究确定，既往存在的梗阻性排尿症状、耻骨后吊带类型以及吊带置入时同期进行手术是吊带修复的危险因素。
Zotero 插件