Cargando…

The effectiveness of surgical correction of uterine prolapse: cervical amputation with uterosacral ligament plication (modified Manchester) versus vaginal hysterectomy with high uterosacral ligament plication

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective of this study is to evaluate cervical amputation with uterosacral ligament plication (modified Manchester) and compare it to vaginal hysterectomy with high uterosacral ligament plication procedure with special regard to the middle compartment. METHODS: Cons...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Boer, Tiny A., Milani, Alfredo L., Kluivers, Kirsten B., Withagen, Mariella I. J., Vierhout, Mark E.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2762528/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19669686
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-0945-3
_version_ 1782172934381502464
author de Boer, Tiny A.
Milani, Alfredo L.
Kluivers, Kirsten B.
Withagen, Mariella I. J.
Vierhout, Mark E.
author_facet de Boer, Tiny A.
Milani, Alfredo L.
Kluivers, Kirsten B.
Withagen, Mariella I. J.
Vierhout, Mark E.
author_sort de Boer, Tiny A.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective of this study is to evaluate cervical amputation with uterosacral ligament plication (modified Manchester) and compare it to vaginal hysterectomy with high uterosacral ligament plication procedure with special regard to the middle compartment. METHODS: Consecutive women with pelvic organ prolapse who underwent either vaginal hysterectomy or a modified Manchester procedure were included. Assessments were made preoperatively and at 1-year follow-up, including physical examination with pelvic organ prolapse quantification standardised questionnaires (incontinence impact questionnaire, urogenital distress inventory, and defaecatory distress inventory). RESULTS: Between 2002 and 2007, 156 patients were included. Ninety-eight patients returned for a 1-year follow-up. In the modified Manchester group, we found no middle compartment recurrence versus two (4%) in the vaginal hysterectomy group. Anterior and posterior compartment prolapse recurrences (stage ≥2) were similar (approximately 50%). Considering operating time and blood loss, modified Manchester was more favourable. There was no difference in the pre- and postoperative subjective scores. The overall functional outcome was acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: We found an excellent performance of both procedures regarding middle compartment recurrences.
format Text
id pubmed-2762528
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27625282009-10-21 The effectiveness of surgical correction of uterine prolapse: cervical amputation with uterosacral ligament plication (modified Manchester) versus vaginal hysterectomy with high uterosacral ligament plication de Boer, Tiny A. Milani, Alfredo L. Kluivers, Kirsten B. Withagen, Mariella I. J. Vierhout, Mark E. Int Urogynecol J Original Article INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective of this study is to evaluate cervical amputation with uterosacral ligament plication (modified Manchester) and compare it to vaginal hysterectomy with high uterosacral ligament plication procedure with special regard to the middle compartment. METHODS: Consecutive women with pelvic organ prolapse who underwent either vaginal hysterectomy or a modified Manchester procedure were included. Assessments were made preoperatively and at 1-year follow-up, including physical examination with pelvic organ prolapse quantification standardised questionnaires (incontinence impact questionnaire, urogenital distress inventory, and defaecatory distress inventory). RESULTS: Between 2002 and 2007, 156 patients were included. Ninety-eight patients returned for a 1-year follow-up. In the modified Manchester group, we found no middle compartment recurrence versus two (4%) in the vaginal hysterectomy group. Anterior and posterior compartment prolapse recurrences (stage ≥2) were similar (approximately 50%). Considering operating time and blood loss, modified Manchester was more favourable. There was no difference in the pre- and postoperative subjective scores. The overall functional outcome was acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: We found an excellent performance of both procedures regarding middle compartment recurrences. Springer-Verlag 2009-08-11 2009 /pmc/articles/PMC2762528/ /pubmed/19669686 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-0945-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2009 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Article
de Boer, Tiny A.
Milani, Alfredo L.
Kluivers, Kirsten B.
Withagen, Mariella I. J.
Vierhout, Mark E.
The effectiveness of surgical correction of uterine prolapse: cervical amputation with uterosacral ligament plication (modified Manchester) versus vaginal hysterectomy with high uterosacral ligament plication
title The effectiveness of surgical correction of uterine prolapse: cervical amputation with uterosacral ligament plication (modified Manchester) versus vaginal hysterectomy with high uterosacral ligament plication
title_full The effectiveness of surgical correction of uterine prolapse: cervical amputation with uterosacral ligament plication (modified Manchester) versus vaginal hysterectomy with high uterosacral ligament plication
title_fullStr The effectiveness of surgical correction of uterine prolapse: cervical amputation with uterosacral ligament plication (modified Manchester) versus vaginal hysterectomy with high uterosacral ligament plication
title_full_unstemmed The effectiveness of surgical correction of uterine prolapse: cervical amputation with uterosacral ligament plication (modified Manchester) versus vaginal hysterectomy with high uterosacral ligament plication
title_short The effectiveness of surgical correction of uterine prolapse: cervical amputation with uterosacral ligament plication (modified Manchester) versus vaginal hysterectomy with high uterosacral ligament plication
title_sort effectiveness of surgical correction of uterine prolapse: cervical amputation with uterosacral ligament plication (modified manchester) versus vaginal hysterectomy with high uterosacral ligament plication
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2762528/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19669686
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-0945-3
work_keys_str_mv AT deboertinya theeffectivenessofsurgicalcorrectionofuterineprolapsecervicalamputationwithuterosacralligamentplicationmodifiedmanchesterversusvaginalhysterectomywithhighuterosacralligamentplication
AT milanialfredol theeffectivenessofsurgicalcorrectionofuterineprolapsecervicalamputationwithuterosacralligamentplicationmodifiedmanchesterversusvaginalhysterectomywithhighuterosacralligamentplication
AT kluiverskirstenb theeffectivenessofsurgicalcorrectionofuterineprolapsecervicalamputationwithuterosacralligamentplicationmodifiedmanchesterversusvaginalhysterectomywithhighuterosacralligamentplication
AT withagenmariellaij theeffectivenessofsurgicalcorrectionofuterineprolapsecervicalamputationwithuterosacralligamentplicationmodifiedmanchesterversusvaginalhysterectomywithhighuterosacralligamentplication
AT vierhoutmarke theeffectivenessofsurgicalcorrectionofuterineprolapsecervicalamputationwithuterosacralligamentplicationmodifiedmanchesterversusvaginalhysterectomywithhighuterosacralligamentplication
AT deboertinya effectivenessofsurgicalcorrectionofuterineprolapsecervicalamputationwithuterosacralligamentplicationmodifiedmanchesterversusvaginalhysterectomywithhighuterosacralligamentplication
AT milanialfredol effectivenessofsurgicalcorrectionofuterineprolapsecervicalamputationwithuterosacralligamentplicationmodifiedmanchesterversusvaginalhysterectomywithhighuterosacralligamentplication
AT kluiverskirstenb effectivenessofsurgicalcorrectionofuterineprolapsecervicalamputationwithuterosacralligamentplicationmodifiedmanchesterversusvaginalhysterectomywithhighuterosacralligamentplication
AT withagenmariellaij effectivenessofsurgicalcorrectionofuterineprolapsecervicalamputationwithuterosacralligamentplicationmodifiedmanchesterversusvaginalhysterectomywithhighuterosacralligamentplication
AT vierhoutmarke effectivenessofsurgicalcorrectionofuterineprolapsecervicalamputationwithuterosacralligamentplicationmodifiedmanchesterversusvaginalhysterectomywithhighuterosacralligamentplication