Suppr超能文献

阴道补片耻骨宫颈固定术与 Uphold™ LITE 阴道支持系统治疗中重度前阴道壁膨出的比较。

A comparison between the vaginal patch plastron associated with the anterior sacrospinous fixation and the Uphold™ LITE vaginal support system for the treatment of advanced anterior vaginal wall prolapse.

机构信息

Department of Gynecology, Jeanne de Flandre University Hospital, 59000 Lille, France.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada.

出版信息

Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2023 Dec;291:162-167. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2023.10.027. Epub 2023 Oct 21.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to compare efficacy and safety of the vaginal patch plastron (VPP) associated to the anterior sacrospinous fixation (SSLF-A) with a TVM procedure (Uphold™ LITE support-system) for the treatment of the advanced anterior vaginal wall prolapse.

STUDY DESIGN

Single-center retrospective study. Women with symptomatic anterior prolapse ≥ III stage according to the POP-quantification (POP-Q) system and submitted to the VPP associated with the SSLF-A or to the Uphold™ procedure were included. Primary outcome was to compare objective and subjective cystocele relapse and reoperation rate at 6- and 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcome was to describe peri- and postoperative complications. Pearson chi-square test and exact Fisher test were adopted for categorical variables, while intergroup Mann-Whitney U test and intragroup Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test for continuous variables; the statistical analysis was conducted at 95 % confidence level.

RESULTS

Fifty-five women in VPP-group and 118 women in Uphold-group were included. At 6-month follow-up, objective anterior relapse in VPP-group (3/55, 5.4 %) was like Uphold-group (5/118, 4.2 %; p = 0.71), as well as objective apical relapse (0/55, 0 % vs 3/118, 2.5 %; p = 0.55); no significant difference emerged in bulge symptoms (1/55, 1.8 % vs 5/118, 4.2 %; p = 0.67). At 12-month follow-up women were telephonically investigated; no significant difference emerged in bulge symptoms (1/55, 1.8 % vs 6/118, 5.1 %; p = 0.43). Reoperation rate for the composite outcome POP relapse, stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and remotion of the TVM resulted lower in the VPP group (1/55, 1.8 % vs 13/118, 11 %; p = 0.03). Post-operative buttock pain (32/55, 58.2 % vs 24/118, 20.3 %; p < 0.0001) and post-operative urinary retention (16/55, 29.1 % vs 6/118, 5.1 %; p < 0.0001) were higher in VPP-group, with a complete resolution between 2 and 3 weeks after treatment.

CONCLUSION

VPP associated with SSLF-A was as effective as Uphold™ LITE support-system for both anterior and central compartment prolapse treatment at 6- and 12-month follow-up. VPP-group presented a lower reoperation rate for the composite outcome prolapse relapse repair, SUI, and removal of the mesh.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较阴道补丁胸甲(VPP)联合前骶骨固定(SSLF-A)与 TVM 手术(Uphold™ LITE 支撑系统)治疗晚期前阴道壁脱垂的疗效和安全性。

研究设计

单中心回顾性研究。纳入符合 POP 定量(POP-Q)系统诊断为≥III 期前阴道脱垂症状的女性,并接受 VPP 联合 SSLF-A 或 Uphold™ 手术治疗。主要结局是比较 6 个月和 12 个月随访时的客观和主观膀胱膨出复发和再次手术率。次要结局是描述围手术期并发症。采用卡方检验和精确 Fisher 检验进行分类变量分析,采用组间 Mann-Whitney U 检验和组内 Wilcoxon 秩和检验进行连续变量分析;统计分析置信水平为 95%。

结果

VPP 组 55 例,Uphold 组 118 例。6 个月随访时,VPP 组(3/55,5.4%)的前侧复发率与 Uphold 组(5/118,4.2%;p=0.71)相似,前顶复发率(0/55,0%vs 3/118,2.5%;p=0.55);膨出症状无显著差异(1/55,1.8%vs 5/118,4.2%;p=0.67)。12 个月随访时,对患者进行电话调查;膨出症状无显著差异(1/55,1.8%vs 6/118,5.1%;p=0.43)。VPP 组复合结局 POP 复发、压力性尿失禁(SUI)和 TVM 移除的再次手术率较低(1/55,1.8%vs 13/118,11%;p=0.03)。VPP 组术后臀部疼痛(32/55,58.2%vs 24/118,20.3%;p<0.0001)和术后尿潴留(16/55,29.1%vs 6/118,5.1%;p<0.0001)发生率较高,但在治疗后 2-3 周内完全缓解。

结论

VPP 联合 SSLF-A 治疗前阴道和中央隔膨出的疗效与 Uphold™ LITE 支撑系统在 6 个月和 12 个月随访时相似。VPP 组复合结局(POP 复发修复、SUI 和网片移除)的再次手术率较低。

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