Frigerio Matteo, Morciano Andrea, Barba Marta, Schiavi Michele Carlo, Cola Alice, Cavaliere Elena, Rappa Carlo, Cervigni Mauro
Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardo dei Tintori, Monza, Italy.
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Panico Pelvic Floor Center, Pia Fondazione "Cardinale G. Panico", Tricase, Italy.
Int J Womens Health. 2024 Dec 17;16:2185-2193. doi: 10.2147/IJWH.S485350. eCollection 2024.
Surgical repair is considered the mainstay of genital prolapse management. Several procedures are available both by vaginal and abdominal route, with and without mesh augmentation. The Italian UroGynecology Association (AIUG) promoted this survey with the aim of evaluating current variations in the surgical management of various types of prolapse in different clinical settings and to compare practice amongst practitioners working in high- and medium/low-volume centers.
The questionnaire examined four contentious areas of contemporary prolapse management. The questionnaire was emailed to the AIUG gynecologist members in Italy in 2023.
A total of 104 complete responses were received, resulting in a 6.9% response rate. Native-tissue repair represents the preferred option in most scenarios and was proposed by 76%, 68.3%, 94.2%, and 52.9% of practitioners in the case of primary anterior, uterovaginal, posterior, and vault prolapse respectively. The use of vaginal mesh in these scenarios is very limited. Native tissue repairs in case of recurrent anterior, posterior, or apical recurrent prolapse would be performed only by 37.5%, 47.1%, and 28% of surgeons respectively. In these cases, the use of mesh - by vaginal and abdominal route - increased significantly.
This survey showed that in Italy surgical management of genital prolapse is very heterogeneous. Native-tissue repair remains the preferred option, but practitioners tend to lose confidence in mesh-free procedures in case of prolapse recurrence. Despite mesh kits recalls and recommendations, the use of transvaginal implants is still considered an option for prolapse repair.
手术修复被认为是生殖器脱垂治疗的主要方法。有多种经阴道和经腹的手术方式可供选择,可使用或不使用网片增强。意大利妇科泌尿协会(AIUG)开展了这项调查,旨在评估不同临床情况下各种类型脱垂手术治疗的当前差异,并比较在高容量和中/低容量中心工作的从业者的实践情况。
问卷调查了当代脱垂治疗中四个有争议的领域。该问卷于2023年通过电子邮件发送给意大利的AIUG妇科医生成员。
共收到104份完整回复,回复率为6.9%。在大多数情况下,自体组织修复是首选方案,在原发性前壁、子宫阴道、后壁和穹窿脱垂病例中,分别有76%、68.3%、94.2%和52.9%的从业者提出采用该方案。在这些情况下,阴道网片的使用非常有限。对于复发性前壁、后壁或顶端复发性脱垂,分别只有37.5%、47.1%和28%的外科医生会进行自体组织修复。在这些情况下,通过阴道和经腹途径使用网片的情况显著增加。
这项调查表明,在意大利,生殖器脱垂的手术治疗差异很大。自体组织修复仍然是首选方案,但在脱垂复发时,从业者往往对无网片手术失去信心。尽管有网片产品召回和相关建议,但经阴道植入物仍被视为脱垂修复的一种选择。