Cargando…

A martius flap in the treatment of iatrogenic distal urogenital fistula

INTRODUCTION: Distal urogenital fistulas (DUF) are usually iatrogenic and are uncommon in Europe. They occur in the urethra or near the bladder neck, and can be caused by vaginal hysterectomy, para-urethral cyst surgery, or erosion of the bladder or urethra from tension-free slings or meshes. The ps...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ignjatovic, Ivan, Basic, Dragoslav, Potic, Milan, Dinic, Ljubomir, Skakic, Aleksandar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6442163/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30088723
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2017.0444
_version_ 1783407660970803200
author Ignjatovic, Ivan
Basic, Dragoslav
Potic, Milan
Dinic, Ljubomir
Skakic, Aleksandar
author_facet Ignjatovic, Ivan
Basic, Dragoslav
Potic, Milan
Dinic, Ljubomir
Skakic, Aleksandar
author_sort Ignjatovic, Ivan
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Distal urogenital fistulas (DUF) are usually iatrogenic and are uncommon in Europe. They occur in the urethra or near the bladder neck, and can be caused by vaginal hysterectomy, para-urethral cyst surgery, or erosion of the bladder or urethra from tension-free slings or meshes. The psychological and physical health consequences of DUF are devastating because most patients consider themselves “healthy” before surgery. Incontinence can appear after successful DUF closure due to previously occult incontinence or urethral incompetence. Additional surgery for incontinence is sometimes necessary to achieve satisfactory outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Martius flap was used in 23 patients between 2000 and 2015. Patient age range was 38-75 years (mean, 58.7). DUF was due to gynecologic surgery for benign disease (15 / 23; 65.2%), mesh / sling erosion (2 / 23; 8.7%), and malignancy (6 / 23; 26.1%). The follow-up period was one year. RESULTS: DUF was closed in 22 patients (95.6%). Satisfaction and complete dryness was achieved in 16 patients (69.6%) after the first procedure. Postoperative complications were: postoperative hematoma in 1 (4.4%), primary failure in 1 (4.4%), overactive bladder (OAB) syndrome in 3 (13.2%) and postoperative incontinence in 6 (26.4%) patients. A fascial sling was placed in patients with incontinence. All patients were dry after the secondary surgery. Anticholinergics were used for the treatment of OAB syndrome. Discomfort at the flap harvesting site was of minor importance. Finally, 22 out of 23 patients (95.6%) were satisfied. CONCLUSION: A Martius flap and additional fascial sling could be successfully used to optimize DUF treatment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6442163
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64421632019-04-05 A martius flap in the treatment of iatrogenic distal urogenital fistula Ignjatovic, Ivan Basic, Dragoslav Potic, Milan Dinic, Ljubomir Skakic, Aleksandar Int Braz J Urol Video Section INTRODUCTION: Distal urogenital fistulas (DUF) are usually iatrogenic and are uncommon in Europe. They occur in the urethra or near the bladder neck, and can be caused by vaginal hysterectomy, para-urethral cyst surgery, or erosion of the bladder or urethra from tension-free slings or meshes. The psychological and physical health consequences of DUF are devastating because most patients consider themselves “healthy” before surgery. Incontinence can appear after successful DUF closure due to previously occult incontinence or urethral incompetence. Additional surgery for incontinence is sometimes necessary to achieve satisfactory outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Martius flap was used in 23 patients between 2000 and 2015. Patient age range was 38-75 years (mean, 58.7). DUF was due to gynecologic surgery for benign disease (15 / 23; 65.2%), mesh / sling erosion (2 / 23; 8.7%), and malignancy (6 / 23; 26.1%). The follow-up period was one year. RESULTS: DUF was closed in 22 patients (95.6%). Satisfaction and complete dryness was achieved in 16 patients (69.6%) after the first procedure. Postoperative complications were: postoperative hematoma in 1 (4.4%), primary failure in 1 (4.4%), overactive bladder (OAB) syndrome in 3 (13.2%) and postoperative incontinence in 6 (26.4%) patients. A fascial sling was placed in patients with incontinence. All patients were dry after the secondary surgery. Anticholinergics were used for the treatment of OAB syndrome. Discomfort at the flap harvesting site was of minor importance. Finally, 22 out of 23 patients (95.6%) were satisfied. CONCLUSION: A Martius flap and additional fascial sling could be successfully used to optimize DUF treatment. Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6442163/ /pubmed/30088723 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2017.0444 Text en https://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 Video Section
Ignjatovic, Ivan
Basic, Dragoslav
Potic, Milan
Dinic, Ljubomir
Skakic, Aleksandar
A martius flap in the treatment of iatrogenic distal urogenital fistula
title A martius flap in the treatment of iatrogenic distal urogenital fistula
title_full A martius flap in the treatment of iatrogenic distal urogenital fistula
title_fullStr A martius flap in the treatment of iatrogenic distal urogenital fistula
title_full_unstemmed A martius flap in the treatment of iatrogenic distal urogenital fistula
title_short A martius flap in the treatment of iatrogenic distal urogenital fistula
title_sort martius flap in the treatment of iatrogenic distal urogenital fistula
topic Video Section
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6442163/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30088723
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2017.0444
work_keys_str_mv AT ignjatovicivan amartiusflapinthetreatmentofiatrogenicdistalurogenitalfistula
AT basicdragoslav amartiusflapinthetreatmentofiatrogenicdistalurogenitalfistula
AT poticmilan amartiusflapinthetreatmentofiatrogenicdistalurogenitalfistula
AT dinicljubomir amartiusflapinthetreatmentofiatrogenicdistalurogenitalfistula
AT skakicaleksandar amartiusflapinthetreatmentofiatrogenicdistalurogenitalfistula
AT ignjatovicivan martiusflapinthetreatmentofiatrogenicdistalurogenitalfistula
AT basicdragoslav martiusflapinthetreatmentofiatrogenicdistalurogenitalfistula
AT poticmilan martiusflapinthetreatmentofiatrogenicdistalurogenitalfistula
AT dinicljubomir martiusflapinthetreatmentofiatrogenicdistalurogenitalfistula
AT skakicaleksandar martiusflapinthetreatmentofiatrogenicdistalurogenitalfistula