Standardizing abdominal sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of apical prolapse: One year on.
Apical prolapse
Efficacy
Follow-up
Sacrocolpopexy
Safety
Journal
International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics
ISSN: 1879-3479
Titre abrégé: Int J Gynaecol Obstet
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0210174
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2019
Oct 2019
Historique:
received:
13
10
2018
revised:
01
04
2019
accepted:
11
07
2019
pubmed:
3
8
2019
medline:
15
11
2019
entrez:
3
8
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To determine the safety and efficacy of a standardized bilateral abdominal sacrocolpopexy using polyvinylidene fluoride mesh 1-year post-operatively. In a retrospective observational study of women undergoing bilateral abdominal sacrocolpo/cervicopexy between July 2013 and October 2016 at the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK, patients were assessed 1 year post-operatively using the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Vaginal Symptoms (ICIQ-VS). The study involved 100 women, 93 of whom were followed up 1 year post-operatively. The primary outcome was apical prolapse rate, of which there were none. Eight women had anterior and four had posterior wall prolapses; four women required vaginal repairs. Eleven women complained of urinary stress incontinence (six worsening and five de novo) and five had subsequent tension-free vaginal tape procedures. One woman had urethral pain and one had mesh exposure into the vagina. Pre-operatively, mean ICIQ-VS score was 27.87 (standard deviation [SD] 6.8), and at 1 year post-operatively it was 5.82 (SD 3.8). Impact on quality of life score dropped by 83.4%, from 8.35 (SD 2.1) to 1.39 (SD 1.1). The modified technique used in the present study retained the advantages of traditional sacrocolpopexy, but required smaller volumes of mesh. We found it to be safe and effective with excellent patient satisfaction at 1 year, and providing a promising treatment option for patients suffering from apical prolapse.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
49-53Informations de copyright
© 2019 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.
Références
Lane FE. Repair of posthysterectomy vaginal-vault prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 1962;20:72-77.
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Post-Hysterectomy Vaginal Vault Prolapse Greentop Guideline No. 46. RCOG. 2015.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Practice bulletin no 176. Pelvic organ prolapse.. ACOG. 2017;129:56-72.
Dietz HP. Prolapse worsens with age, doesn't it? Aust N Z J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;48:587-591.
Betschart C, Cervigni M, Contreras Ortiz O, et al. Management of apical compartment prolapse (uterine and vault prolapse): A FIGO Working Group report. Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36:507-513.
Jager W, Mirenska O, Brugge S. Surgical treatment of mixed and urge urinary incontinence in women. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2012;74:157-164.
Culligan PJ, Blackwell L, Goldsmith LJ, Graham CA, Rogers A, Heit MH. A randomised controlled trial comparing fascia lata and synthetic mesh for sacral colpopexy. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106:29-37.
Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Schmid C. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(4):CD004014.
Karabulut A, Simavli SA, Abban GM, et al. Tissue reaction to urogynecologic meshes: Effect of steroid soaking in two different mesh models. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27:1583-1589.
Urogynecologic Surgical Mesh: Update on the Safety and Effectiveness of Transvaginal Placement for Pelvic Organ Prolapse. 2011. https://www.fda.gov/media/81123/download. http://www.iciq.net/ICIQ-VS.html. Accessed March 22, 2019.
Urogynecologic Surgical Mesh Implants. https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/implants-and-prosthetics/urogynecologic-surgical-mesh-implants. Accessed April 02, 2019.
Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy; a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:805-823.
Rajshekhar S, Mukhopadhyay S, Morris E. Early safety and efficacy outcomes of a novel technique of sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of apical prolapse. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2016;135:182-186.
International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Vaginal Symptoms Module (ICIQ-VS). http://www.iciq.net/ICIQ-VS.html. Accessed March 10, 2019.
Jeon MJ, Moon YJ, Jung HJ, et al. A long-term treatment outcome of abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Yonsei Med J. 2009;50:807-813.
Brubaker L. Sacrocolpopexy and the anterior compartment: Support and function. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;173:1690-1695.
Nygaard I, Brubaker L, Zyczynski HM, et al. Long-term outcomes following abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. JAMA. 2013;309:2016-2024.
Geller EJ, Barbee ER, Wu JM, Loomis MJ, Visco AG. Validation of telephone administration of 2 condition-specific-quality-of-life questionnaires. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197:632.e1-632.e4.
Swift S, Woodman P, O'Boyle A, et al. Pelvic Organ Support Study (POSST): The distribution, clinical definition, and epidemiological condition of pelvic organ support defects. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:795-806.
Barber MD, Brubaker L, Nygaard I, et al. Defining success after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:600-609.
Baessler K, Schuessler B. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy and anatomy and function of the posterior compartment. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97:678-684.
Muhl T, Binnebosel M, Klinge U, Goedderz T. New objective measurement to characterize the porosity of textile implants. J Biomed Mater Res B App Biomater. 2008;24:292-299.
Balsamo R, Illiano E, Zucchi A, et al. Sacrocolpopexy with polyvinylidene fluoride mesh for pelvic organ prolapse: Mid term comparative outcomes with polypropylene mesh. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018;220:74-78.
Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B, Ottinger AP, et al. PVDF as a new polymer for the construction of surgical meshes. Biomaterials. 2002;23:3487-3493.
Klink CD, Junge K, Binnebosel M, Alizai HP, Otto J, Neumann UP. Comparison of long-term biocompatibility of PVDF and PP meshes. J Invest Surg. 2016;24:292-299.
Chen L, Ramanah R, Hsu Y, Ashton-Miller JA, DeLancey JOL. Cardinal and deep uterosacral ligament lines of action: MRI based 3D technique development and preliminary findings in normal women. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24:37-45.
Brubaker L, Nygaard I, Richter HE, et al. Two-tear outcomes after sacrocolpopexy with and without burch to prevent urinary stress incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112:49-55.
Begley JS, Kupferman SP, Kuznetsov DD, et al. Incidence and management of abdominal sacrocolpopexy mesh erosions. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:1956-1962.
Shepherd JP, Higdon HL, Stanford EJ, Mattox TF. Effect of suture selection on the rate of suture or mesh erosion and the surgery failure in abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2010;16:229-233.
Thomas AZ, Giri KS, Cox A-M, Creagh T. Long-term quality-of-life outcome after mesh sacrocolpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse. BJU Int. 2009;104:1676-1679.