Cargando…

Uterine preservation for advanced pelvic organ prolapse repair: Anatomical results and patient satisfaction

OBJECTIVE: The aims of the current study were to evaluate outcomes and patient satisfaction in cases of uterine prolapse treated with vaginal mesh, while preserving the uterus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study that included all patients operated for prolapse repair with tr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fink, Keshet, Shachar, Inbar Ben, Braun, Naama Marcus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5006774/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27564289
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0656
_version_ 1782451120726081536
author Fink, Keshet
Shachar, Inbar Ben
Braun, Naama Marcus
author_facet Fink, Keshet
Shachar, Inbar Ben
Braun, Naama Marcus
author_sort Fink, Keshet
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The aims of the current study were to evaluate outcomes and patient satisfaction in cases of uterine prolapse treated with vaginal mesh, while preserving the uterus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study that included all patients operated for prolapse repair with trocar-less vaginal mesh while preserving the uterus between October 2010 and March 2013. Data included: patients pre-and post-operative symptoms, POP-Q and operative complications. Success was defined as prolapse < than stage 2. A telephone survey questionnaire was used to evaluate patient's satisfaction. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients with pelvic organ prolapse stage 3, including uterine pro-lapse of at least stage 2 (mean point C at+1.4 (range+8-(-1)) were included. Mean follow-up was 22 months. Success rate of the vaginal mesh procedure aimed to repair uterine prolapse was 92% (61/66), with mean point C at −6.7 (range (-1) - (-9)). No major intra-or post-operative complication occurred. A telephone survey questionnaire was conducted post-operatively 28 months on average. Ninety-eight percent of women were satisfied with the decision to preserve their uterus. Eighteen patients (34%) received prior consultation elsewhere for hysterectomy due to their prolapse, and decided to have the operation at our center in order to preserve the uterus. CONCLUSIONS: Uterine preservation with vaginal mesh was found to be a safe and effective treatment, even in cases with advanced uterine prolapse. Most patients prefer to keep their uterus. Uterus preservation options should be discussed with every patient before surgery for pelvic organ prolapse.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5006774
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50067742016-09-06 Uterine preservation for advanced pelvic organ prolapse repair: Anatomical results and patient satisfaction Fink, Keshet Shachar, Inbar Ben Braun, Naama Marcus Int Braz J Urol Original Article OBJECTIVE: The aims of the current study were to evaluate outcomes and patient satisfaction in cases of uterine prolapse treated with vaginal mesh, while preserving the uterus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study that included all patients operated for prolapse repair with trocar-less vaginal mesh while preserving the uterus between October 2010 and March 2013. Data included: patients pre-and post-operative symptoms, POP-Q and operative complications. Success was defined as prolapse < than stage 2. A telephone survey questionnaire was used to evaluate patient's satisfaction. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients with pelvic organ prolapse stage 3, including uterine pro-lapse of at least stage 2 (mean point C at+1.4 (range+8-(-1)) were included. Mean follow-up was 22 months. Success rate of the vaginal mesh procedure aimed to repair uterine prolapse was 92% (61/66), with mean point C at −6.7 (range (-1) - (-9)). No major intra-or post-operative complication occurred. A telephone survey questionnaire was conducted post-operatively 28 months on average. Ninety-eight percent of women were satisfied with the decision to preserve their uterus. Eighteen patients (34%) received prior consultation elsewhere for hysterectomy due to their prolapse, and decided to have the operation at our center in order to preserve the uterus. CONCLUSIONS: Uterine preservation with vaginal mesh was found to be a safe and effective treatment, even in cases with advanced uterine prolapse. Most patients prefer to keep their uterus. Uterus preservation options should be discussed with every patient before surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC5006774/ /pubmed/27564289 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0656 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Fink, Keshet
Shachar, Inbar Ben
Braun, Naama Marcus
Uterine preservation for advanced pelvic organ prolapse repair: Anatomical results and patient satisfaction
title Uterine preservation for advanced pelvic organ prolapse repair: Anatomical results and patient satisfaction
title_full Uterine preservation for advanced pelvic organ prolapse repair: Anatomical results and patient satisfaction
title_fullStr Uterine preservation for advanced pelvic organ prolapse repair: Anatomical results and patient satisfaction
title_full_unstemmed Uterine preservation for advanced pelvic organ prolapse repair: Anatomical results and patient satisfaction
title_short Uterine preservation for advanced pelvic organ prolapse repair: Anatomical results and patient satisfaction
title_sort uterine preservation for advanced pelvic organ prolapse repair: anatomical results and patient satisfaction
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5006774/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27564289
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0656
work_keys_str_mv AT finkkeshet uterinepreservationforadvancedpelvicorganprolapserepairanatomicalresultsandpatientsatisfaction
AT shacharinbarben uterinepreservationforadvancedpelvicorganprolapserepairanatomicalresultsandpatientsatisfaction
AT braunnaamamarcus uterinepreservationforadvancedpelvicorganprolapserepairanatomicalresultsandpatientsatisfaction