• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

经阴道骶骨固定术时模拟顶支持下的前阴道壁膨出的前修补与不修补。

Anterior repair versus no anterior repair for anterior vaginal wall prolapse resolved under simulated apical support at the time of uterosacral ligament suspension.

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 103 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, South Korea.

出版信息

Int Urogynecol J. 2020 Oct;31(10):2043-2049. doi: 10.1007/s00192-020-04229-0. Epub 2020 Feb 11.

DOI:10.1007/s00192-020-04229-0
PMID:32047967
Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

The aim of this study was to compare treatment outcomes 1 year after uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS) with or without concomitant anterior repair (AR) for anterior vaginal wall prolapse resolved under simulated apical support.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 179 women who underwent USLS with or without concomitant AR for Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POPQ) stage 2-4 anterior vaginal wall prolapse resolved under simulated apical support, and who completed a 1-year follow-up. The primary outcome was composite surgical failure defined as anterior anatomical recurrence (point Ba>0), symptomatic recurrence (presence of vaginal bulge symptoms), or retreatment for prolapse. Secondary outcomes included changes in POPQ values and Urogenital Distress Inventory-6 (UDI-6) scores, perioperative outcomes, and complications.

RESULTS

Eighty-six women underwent concomitant AR, and 93 did not. The group receiving AR had more advanced anterior and apical prolapse. Surgical failure rates were significantly higher in the group not receiving AR than in the group receiving AR (21.5% vs 7.0%, p < 0.01). However, there were no differences in the mean point Ba and C values and UDI-6 scores through 12 months postoperatively between the two groups. Operating times were longer, and adverse events, such as immediate postoperative urinary retention and minor wound complications, were more frequent in the group receiving AR (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant AR at the time of USLS seems to reduce the recurrence of anterior vaginal wall prolapse without significant morbidity. Considering the small difference in anatomical outcomes, a longer follow-up period will be required to confirm this.

摘要

引言与假设

本研究旨在比较经阴道骶骨固定术(USLS)联合或不联合前修补术(AR)治疗模拟顶托下缓解的前阴道壁脱垂 1 年的治疗效果。

方法

本回顾性队列研究纳入了 179 例因 Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification(POPQ)2-4 期前阴道壁脱垂,模拟顶托下缓解而接受 USLS 联合或不联合 AR 的患者,且均完成了 1 年随访。主要结局为复合手术失败,定义为前解剖学复发(Ba 点>0)、症状复发(存在阴道膨出症状)或因脱垂再次治疗。次要结局包括 POPQ 值和 Urogenital Distress Inventory-6(UDI-6)评分的变化、围手术期结局和并发症。

结果

86 例患者接受了 AR,93 例未接受。接受 AR 的患者前壁和顶壁脱垂更严重。未接受 AR 的患者手术失败率显著高于接受 AR 的患者(21.5% vs. 7.0%,p<0.01)。然而,两组患者术后 12 个月的 Ba 和 C 点均值以及 UDI-6 评分均无差异。接受 AR 的患者手术时间较长,且术后即刻发生尿潴留和轻微伤口并发症等不良事件更为频繁(p<0.05)。

结论

USLS 时联合 AR 似乎可以降低前阴道壁脱垂的复发率,而不会显著增加发病率。考虑到解剖学结局的微小差异,需要更长的随访时间来证实这一点。

相似文献

1
Anterior repair versus no anterior repair for anterior vaginal wall prolapse resolved under simulated apical support at the time of uterosacral ligament suspension.经阴道骶骨固定术时模拟顶支持下的前阴道壁膨出的前修补与不修补。
Int Urogynecol J. 2020 Oct;31(10):2043-2049. doi: 10.1007/s00192-020-04229-0. Epub 2020 Feb 11.
2
Posterior repair versus no posterior repair for posterior vaginal wall prolapse resolved under simulated apical support at the time of native tissue apical suspension.经阴道固有组织悬吊带术时模拟顶支持下,阴道后壁脱垂行后壁修补与不行后壁修补的比较。
Int Urogynecol J. 2021 Aug;32(8):2203-2209. doi: 10.1007/s00192-021-04728-8. Epub 2021 Feb 26.
3
Laparoscopic Uterosacral Ligament Hysteropexy vs Total Vaginal Hysterectomy with Uterosacral Ligament Suspension for Anterior and Apical Prolapse: Surgical Outcome and Patient Satisfaction.腹腔镜子宫骶骨韧带固定术与经阴道全子宫切除术联合子宫骶骨韧带悬吊术治疗前位和前顶脱垂:手术结果和患者满意度。
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020 Jan;27(1):88-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2019.02.012. Epub 2019 Feb 22.
4
[A five-year analysis of effect on transvaginal high uterosacral ligament suspension with or without native-tissue repair for middle compartment defect].[对有或无自体组织修复的经阴道高位子宫骶韧带悬吊术治疗中盆腔缺陷效果的五年分析]
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2019 Jul 25;54(7):445-451. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567x.2019.07.003.
5
Risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse recurrence after sacrospinous hysteropexy or vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension.经骶骨固定术或阴道子宫切除术联合子宫骶骨韧带悬吊术后盆腔器官脱垂复发的危险因素。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Aug;227(2):252.e1-252.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.04.017. Epub 2022 Apr 16.
6
Effect of Uterosacral Ligament Suspension vs Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation With or Without Perioperative Behavioral Therapy for Pelvic Organ Vaginal Prolapse on Surgical Outcomes and Prolapse Symptoms at 5 Years in the OPTIMAL Randomized Clinical Trial.Uterosacral 韧带悬吊术与骶棘韧带固定术联合或不联合围手术期行为疗法治疗盆腔器官阴道脱垂 5 年的手术结果和脱垂症状的影响:OPTIMAL 随机临床试验。
JAMA. 2018 Apr 17;319(15):1554-1565. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.2827.
7
High Uterosacral Ligaments Suspension for Post-Hysterectomy Vaginal Vault Prolapse Repair.高位子宫骶骨韧带悬吊术在子宫切除术后阴道穹窿脱垂修复中的应用。
Medicina (Kaunas). 2024 Feb 13;60(2):320. doi: 10.3390/medicina60020320.
8
Preoperative POPQ versus Simulated Apical Support as a Guideline for Anterior or Posterior Repair at the Time of Transvaginal Apical Suspension (PREPARE trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.术前 POPQ 与模拟顶点支撑作为阴道顶端悬吊术时行前或后修补的指南(PREPARE 试验):一项随机对照试验的研究方案。
BMJ Open. 2020 Jan 6;10(1):e034170. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034170.
9
Abdominal and vaginal pelvic support with concomitant hysterectomy for uterovaginal pelvic prolapse: a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis.经腹及经阴道联合子宫切除术治疗女性生殖道盆腔脏器脱垂的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Int Urogynecol J. 2021 Aug;32(8):2021-2031. doi: 10.1007/s00192-021-04861-4. Epub 2021 May 29.
10
[Long-term effectiveness of transvaginal high uterosacral ligament suspension].经阴道高位骶子宫韧带悬吊术的长期疗效
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2017 Jun 25;52(6):363-368. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567X.2017.06.002.

引用本文的文献

1
Pelvic Floor Reconstruction Using Mesh Versus Campbell Uterosacral Ligament Suspension: 2-Year Clinical Outcome.使用网片与坎贝尔子宫骶骨韧带悬吊术进行盆底重建:2年临床结果
Int Urogynecol J. 2025 Sep 18. doi: 10.1007/s00192-025-06296-7.
2
Transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery for uterosacral ligament suspension: pilot study of 35 cases of severe pelvic organ prolapse.经阴道自然腔道内镜手术行子宫骶骨韧带悬吊术治疗重度盆腔器官脱垂:35 例初步研究。
BMC Surg. 2021 Jun 8;21(1):286. doi: 10.1186/s12893-021-01280-6.
3
Posterior repair versus no posterior repair for posterior vaginal wall prolapse resolved under simulated apical support at the time of native tissue apical suspension.
经阴道固有组织悬吊带术时模拟顶支持下,阴道后壁脱垂行后壁修补与不行后壁修补的比较。
Int Urogynecol J. 2021 Aug;32(8):2203-2209. doi: 10.1007/s00192-021-04728-8. Epub 2021 Feb 26.
4
Comparison of treatment outcomes for native tissue repair and sacrocolpopexy as apical suspension procedures at the time of hysterectomy for uterine prolapse.子宫脱垂行子宫切除术时,作为顶端悬吊手术的自体组织修复与骶棘韧带固定术治疗效果的比较。
Sci Rep. 2021 Feb 4;11(1):3119. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-82732-0.