Journals / Balkan Medical Journal / 2018 / Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 5

The Novel and Minimally Invasive Treatment Modalities for Female Pelvic Floor Muscle Dysfunction; Beyond the Traditional

Pages
358–366
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The development of thesevarious treatment options has implications for future surgical practicein the field of uro-gynecology.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Pelvic floor dysfunction is a clinical entity that is prevalent amongfemale patients.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Determining the exact underlying cause of pelvicfloor dysfunction is difficult, and surgical intervention for this clinicalentity may be challenging.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The development of thesevarious treatment options has implications for future surgical practicein the field of uro-gynecology.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Pelvic floor dysfunction is a clinical entity that is prevalent amongfemale patients. Determining the exact underlying cause of pelvicfloor dysfunction is difficult, and surgical intervention for this clinicalentity may be challenging. Pelvic floor dysfunction can affect thequality of life of the patient by causing stress urinary incontinence,pelvic organ prolapse, or both. Well-defined surgical treatmentoptions, minimally invasive approaches, and novel techniques for thetreatment of pelvic floor dysfunction have been recently introduced.Here, we evaluated the management options available for patientswith stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. Wesearched Medline and EMBASE databases for relevant articles byusing the keywords “pelvic floor dysfunction,” “minimally invasiveprocedures,” “stress urinary incontinence,” “pelvic organ prolapse,”and “novel techniques”. Traditional treatment options for stressurinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse are beyond thescope of our review. Laparoscopic and robotic surgical treatmentsfor pelvic floor dysfunction continue to evolve and develop. Theseminimally invasive techniques will soon replace open procedures.Alternative novel treatment modalities have also been developed fromnovel human-compatible materials and are emerging as successfultreatments for stress urinary incontinence. The development of thesevarious treatment options has implications for future surgical practicein the field of uro-gynecology.

🔖

Cite This Article

AKIN, Y., ELMUSSAREH, M., GÖZEN, A. S., YOUNG, M., CHARALAMPOGİANNİS, N. (2022). The Novel and Minimally Invasive Treatment Modalities for Female Pelvic Floor Muscle Dysfunction; Beyond the Traditional. Balkan Medical Journal, Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 5, 358–366. https://ajindex.com/articles/461086

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Serati M, Bogani G, Sorice P, Braga A, Torella M, Salvatore S, et al. Robot-assisted Sacrocolpopexy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Comparative Studies. Eur Urol 2014;66:303-18.
  2. Sarlos D, Kots L, Ryu G, Schaer G. Long-term follow-up of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J 2014;25:1207-12.
  3. Price N, Slack A, Jackson SR. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: an observational study of functional and anatomical outcomes. Int Urogynecol J 2011;22:77-82.
  4. Granese R, Candiani M, Perino A, Romano F, Cucinella G. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse: 8-years’ experience. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2009;146:227-31.
  5. Freeman RM, Pantazis K, Thomson A, Frappell J, Bombieri L, Moran P, et al. A randomised controlled trial of abdominal versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: LAS study. Int Urogynecol J 2013;24:377-84.
  6. Khan A, Alperin M, Wu N, Clemens JQ, Dubina E, Pashos CL, et al. Comparative outcomes of open versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy among Medicare beneficiaries. Int Urogynecol J 2013;24:1883-91.
  7. Vaudano G, Gatti M. Correction of vaginal vault prolapse using Capio™ suture capturing device: our experience. Minerva Ginecol 2015;67:103-11.
  8. Leone Roberti Maggiore U, Alessandri F, Remorgida V, Venturini PL, Ferrero S. Vaginal sacrospinous colpopexy using the Capio suture-capturing device versus traditional technique: feasibility and outcome. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2013;287:267-74.
  9. Tseng LH, Chen I, Chang SD, Lee CL. Modern role of sacrospinous ligament fixation for pelvic organ prolapse surgery a systemic review. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2013;52:311-7.
  10. Febbraro W, Beucher G, Von Theobald P, Hamel P, Barjot P, Heisert M, et al. Feasibility of bilateral sacrospinous ligament vaginal suspension with a stapler. Prospective studies with the 34 first cases. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 1997;26:815-21.
  11. Deng M, Ding J, Ai F, Zhu L. Successful use of the Gellhorn pessary as a second-line pessary in women with advanced pelvic organ prolapse. Menopause 2017;24:1277-81.
  12. Panman CM, Wiegersma M, Kollen BJ, Burger H, Berger MY, Dekker JH. Predictors of unsuccessful pessary fitting in women with prolapse: a cross-sectional study in general practice. Int Urogynecol J 2017;28:307-13. Culligan PJ. Nonsurgical management of pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 2012;119:852-60. Swift S. Current opinion on the classification and definition of genital t