Suppr超能文献

比较 Prolift、Perigee-Apogee、Prosima 和 Elevate 经阴道网片系统在盆腔器官脱垂手术中的应用:一项长期观察研究的临床结局。

Comparison of Prolift, Perigee-Apogee, Prosima, and Elevate transvaginal mesh systems in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: Clinical outcomes of a long-term observational study.

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital; Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.

出版信息

Low Urin Tract Symptoms. 2022 Jan;14(1):47-56. doi: 10.1111/luts.12408. Epub 2021 Aug 18.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and compare the long-term clinical outcomes of four different transvaginal mesh systems.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 695 patients classified into four groups (Prolift, n = 132; Perigee-Apogee, n = 186; Prosima, n = 60; Elevate; n = 317), with a median follow-up time of 5.8 years (range 0.5-12.2 years). The outcomes were objective anatomic success (Pelvic Organ Prolapse [POP] Quantification system stage ≤1), mesh exposure, and urologic functional assessments.

RESULTS

For anatomic outcomes, we stepwise analyzed the short-term (within 3 years) and long-term (after 3 years) results. Prolift had the highest long-term success rate (9 years: 82.1%, P = .007). Elevate had a comparable short-term success rate (3 years: 87.5%), but its long-term success rate significantly decreased over time (5 years: 78.6%, 9 years: 66.8%, P = .007). Prosima had the lowest short-term success rate (P = .027). For the long-term mesh exposure rate (9-year cumulative), Elevate had the lowest with 11.1%; next were Perigee-Apogee (18.8%) and Prolift (24.6%); and Prosima had the highest with 39.4%, with a significant difference. In terms of urinary functional results, we observed no significant differences in voiding dysfunction, de novo stress urinary incontinence, or de novo overactive bladder symptoms among the four mesh groups, whether combined with midurethral sling surgery or not.

CONCLUSION

Different vaginal mesh designs have various advantages and features. Prolift provided the best long-term anatomic success but had a high mesh exposure rate. Elevate gave comparable short-term success but had a decreased long-term success rate. However, Elevate is superior with the lowest long-term mesh exposure rate. Prosima had the worst anatomic correction and highest mesh exposure rates. This study provides a comprehensive long-term comparative result for POP patients and surgeons.

摘要

目的

评估和比较四种不同经阴道网片系统的长期临床结果。

方法

本回顾性研究纳入 695 例患者,分为四组(普罗利夫,n=132;佩里吉-阿波吉,n=186;普罗西玛,n=60;埃利维特,n=317),中位随访时间为 5.8 年(0.5-12.2 年)。评估指标为客观解剖学成功(盆腔器官脱垂定量系统分期≤1)、网片暴露和尿功能评估。

结果

在解剖学结果方面,我们逐步分析了短期(3 年内)和长期(3 年后)结果。普罗利夫具有最高的长期成功率(9 年:82.1%,P=0.007)。埃利维特具有相似的短期成功率(3 年:87.5%),但随着时间的推移,其长期成功率显著下降(5 年:78.6%,9 年:66.8%,P=0.007)。普罗西玛的短期成功率最低(P=0.027)。对于 9 年累计网片暴露率,埃利维特最低(11.1%),其次是佩里吉-阿波吉(18.8%)和普罗利夫(24.6%),普罗西玛最高(39.4%),差异有统计学意义。在尿功能结果方面,无论是否联合使用中尿道吊带手术,四个网片组在排尿功能障碍、新发压力性尿失禁或新发膀胱过度活动症症状方面均无显著差异。

结论

不同阴道网片设计具有各自的优势和特点。普罗利夫提供了最佳的长期解剖学成功,但网片暴露率较高。埃利维特具有相似的短期成功率,但长期成功率下降。然而,埃利维特的网片长期暴露率最低。普罗西玛的解剖学矫正效果最差,网片暴露率最高。本研究为 POP 患者和外科医生提供了全面的长期比较结果。

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