• 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

腹腔镜高位子宫骶韧带悬吊术与骶骨阴道固定术治疗中重度顶端脱垂的中期比较

Midterm comparison of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse.

作者信息

Guan Yiqi, Zhang Kun, Han Jinsong, Yao Ying, Wang Yiting, Yang Junfang

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, No.49 North Garden Street, 100191, Beijing, China.

出版信息

Int Urogynecol J. 2023 Oct;34(10):2501-2506. doi: 10.1007/s00192-023-05552-y. Epub 2023 May 24.

DOI:10.1007/s00192-023-05552-y
PMID:37222736
Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

The objective was to retrospectively analyze the midterm efficacy of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension (HUS) and sacrocolpopexy (SC) in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse.

METHODS

Patients who underwent laparoscopic HUS and SC in our center from 2013 to 2019 with follow-ups were included, consisting of laparoscopic HUS (group A, n=72) or SC (mesh added, group B, n=54). The general data of patients, pelvic organ prolapse quantitative examination (POP-Q) score, Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory short form 20 score (PFDI-20) before and after operation, perioperative conditions, Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), and postoperative complications were collected for statistical analysis and comparison between groups.

RESULTS

There was no statistical difference in preoperative data between groups. The median follow-up time was 48 months. The objective recurrence rate of group A was higher than that of group B, without statistical significance. One patient in group B had a second operation owing to recurrence. The exposure rate of mesh in group B was 3.70%. There was no significant difference in deviation of POP-Q and PFDI-20 pre- and post-operation. The proportion of new defecation abnormalities in group A was lower. The total hospitalization expenses and surgical consumables in group B were significantly higher than those in group A.

CONCLUSIONS

The midterm curative effect of laparoscopic HUS is similar to that of SC in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse. The former has the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss, shorter postoperative hospital stay, lower cost, fewer new defecation abnormalities, and there were no complications related to mesh.

摘要

引言与假设

目的是回顾性分析腹腔镜高位子宫骶韧带悬吊术(HUS)和骶骨阴道固定术(SC)治疗中重度顶端脱垂的中期疗效。

方法

纳入2013年至2019年在本中心接受腹腔镜HUS和SC手术并进行随访的患者,包括腹腔镜HUS组(A组,n = 72)或SC组(加用网片,B组,n = 54)。收集患者的一般资料、盆腔器官脱垂定量检查(POP-Q)评分、手术前后盆底功能障碍问卷简表20评分(PFDI-20)、围手术期情况、患者整体改善印象(PGI-I)及术后并发症,进行统计学分析并比较两组情况。

结果

两组术前数据无统计学差异。中位随访时间为48个月。A组的客观复发率高于B组,但无统计学意义。B组有1例患者因复发接受了二次手术。B组网片暴露率为3.70%。POP-Q和PFDI-20手术前后的偏差无显著差异。A组新出现排便异常的比例较低。B组的总住院费用和手术耗材费用显著高于A组。

结论

腹腔镜HUS治疗中重度顶端脱垂的中期疗效与SC相似。前者具有术中出血少、术后住院时间短、成本低、新出现排便异常少等优点,且无与网片相关的并发症。

相似文献

1
Midterm comparison of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse.腹腔镜高位子宫骶韧带悬吊术与骶骨阴道固定术治疗中重度顶端脱垂的中期比较
Int Urogynecol J. 2023 Oct;34(10):2501-2506. doi: 10.1007/s00192-023-05552-y. Epub 2023 May 24.
2
[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.
3
Prolapse recurrence following sacrocolpopexy vs uterosacral ligament suspension: a comparison stratified by Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification stage.骶棘韧带固定术与子宫骶骨韧带悬吊术后脱垂复发情况:按盆腔器官脱垂定量分期分层比较
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jan;218(1):116.e1-116.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.09.015. Epub 2017 Sep 23.
4
[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.
5
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.
6
RCT of vaginal extraperitoneal uterosacral ligament suspension (VEULS) with anterior mesh versus sacrocolpopexy: 4-year outcome.阴道腹膜外子宫骶韧带悬吊术(VEULS)联合前路补片与骶骨阴道固定术的随机对照试验:4年随访结果
Int Urogynecol J. 2018 Nov;29(11):1607-1614. doi: 10.1007/s00192-018-3687-2. Epub 2018 Jun 30.
7
Laparoscopic High Uterosacral Ligament Suspension vs. Laparoscopic Sacral Colpopexy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Case-Control Study.腹腔镜高位子宫骶韧带悬吊术与腹腔镜骶骨阴道固定术治疗盆腔器官脱垂的病例对照研究
Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Mar 4;9:853694. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.853694. eCollection 2022.
8
[Mid-term efficacy of laparoscopic sacral colpopexy of combined transabdominal-transvaginal approach in the treatment of stage Ⅳ pelvic organ prolapse].经腹-经阴道联合入路腹腔镜骶骨阴道固定术治疗Ⅳ度盆腔器官脱垂的中期疗效
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2019 Mar 25;54(3):160-165. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567x.2019.03.004.
9
Comparison between laparoscopic uterus/sacrocolpopexy and total pelvic floor reconstruction with vaginal mesh for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.腹腔镜子宫/骶骨阴道固定术与经阴道网片全盆底重建术治疗盆腔器官脱垂的比较
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2019 Apr;45(4):915-922. doi: 10.1111/jog.13908. Epub 2019 Jan 16.
10
[Transvaginal Prosima mesh and high uterosacral ligament suspension in the treatment of severe pelvic organ prolapsey].经阴道Prosima网片及高位子宫骶韧带悬吊术治疗重度盆腔器官脱垂
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2012 Jul;47(7):500-4.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison of laparoscopic lateral suspension and high uterosacral ligament suspension for apical prolapse: a retrospective clinical study.腹腔镜侧方悬吊术与高位子宫骶韧带悬吊术治疗阴道顶端脱垂的比较:一项回顾性临床研究
Tech Coloproctol. 2025 Mar 24;29(1):84. doi: 10.1007/s10151-025-03124-4.
2
Erroneous and Incomplete Reporting of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System.盆腔器官脱垂定量系统的错误及不完整报告
Int Urogynecol J. 2025 Feb;36(2):243-252. doi: 10.1007/s00192-024-05988-w. Epub 2024 Nov 20.

本文引用的文献

1
Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy and apical suspension: 7-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.腹腔镜子宫骶骨固定术与阴道子宫切除术和顶端悬吊术比较:一项随机对照试验的 7 年随访结果。
Int Urogynecol J. 2022 Jul;33(7):1957-1965. doi: 10.1007/s00192-021-04932-6. Epub 2021 Aug 23.
2
Current situation of complications related to reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse: a multicenter study.盆腔器官脱垂重建术后相关并发症的现状:一项多中心研究。
Int Urogynecol J. 2021 Aug;32(8):2149-2157. doi: 10.1007/s00192-021-04892-x. Epub 2021 Jun 24.
3
Recurrent apical prolapse after high uterosacral ligament suspension - in a heterogenous cohort characterised by a high prevalence of previous pelvic operations.
高位骶骨子宫韧带悬吊术后复发性穹窿脱垂 - 在一个以既往盆腔手术高患病率为特征的异质队列中。
BMC Womens Health. 2019 Jul 12;19(1):96. doi: 10.1186/s12905-019-0800-8.
4
An epidemiologic study on symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse in obese Chinese women: a population-based study in China.中国肥胖女性有症状盆腔器官脱垂的流行病学研究:一项基于中国人群的研究。
Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2018 Nov 16;11:761-766. doi: 10.2147/DMSO.S184451. eCollection 2018.
5
Graft and Mesh Use in Transvaginal Prolapse Repair: A Systematic Review.阴道脱垂修复术中移植物和补片的应用:一项系统评价
Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Jul;128(1):81-91. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001451.
6
Laparoscopic wrap round mesh sacrohysteropexy for the management of apical prolapse.腹腔镜环绕网片骶骨子宫固定术治疗顶端脱垂
Int Urogynecol J. 2016 Dec;27(12):1889-1897. doi: 10.1007/s00192-016-3054-0. Epub 2016 Jun 1.
7
Efficacy and pregnancy outcomes of laparoscopic single sheet mesh sacrohysteropexy.腹腔镜单张网片骶骨子宫固定术的疗效及妊娠结局
Neurourol Urodyn. 2017 Mar;36(3):787-793. doi: 10.1002/nau.23026. Epub 2016 May 25.
8
Risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse and its recurrence: a systematic review.盆腔器官脱垂及其复发的危险因素:一项系统综述。
Int Urogynecol J. 2015 Nov;26(11):1559-73. doi: 10.1007/s00192-015-2695-8. Epub 2015 May 13.
9
Incidence and risk factors of postoperative stress urinary incontinence following laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in patients with negative preoperative prolapse reduction stress testing.术前脱垂复位压力测试阴性患者腹腔镜骶骨阴道固定术后压力性尿失禁的发生率及危险因素
Int Urogynecol J. 2013 Mar;24(3):485-91. doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-1888-7. Epub 2012 Jul 24.
10
An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for reporting outcomes of surgical procedures for pelvic organ prolapse.国际尿控协会(IUGA)/国际尿失禁学会(ICS)关于盆腔器官脱垂手术治疗结果报告术语的联合报告。
Int Urogynecol J. 2012 May;23(5):527-35. doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-1726-y.