SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Kocaeli Tıp Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2

Our Recurrence Ratios in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgical Repair

Pelvik Organ Prolapsusu Cerrahi Onarımında Nüks Oranlarımız

Gökmen SUKGEN
Ünal Türkay
Pages
1–7
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

In all cases, the overall recurrence ratio was 12.69%.DISCUSSION and CONCLUSION: A significant relationship between menopause and POP recurrence was determined.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:ABSTRACTINTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to assess the recurrence ratios of pelvic organ prolapse surgical repair.METHODS: Between June 2012 and May 2017, 126 nonrandomly selected women underwent pelvic organ prolapse surgical repair.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The patients were divided into four groups as follows; anterior repair group (n=64), posterior repair group (n=29), anteriorposterior repair group (n=13), and vaginal cuff prolapse group (n=20).RESULTS: Mean age of the 126 patients was 58.5 ± 10.8 years (min. 42, max. 75), while mean weight was 70 ±12.7 kg (min. 48 kg, max. 92 kg) and mean parity was 3 (min. 0, max. 6).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In all cases, the overall recurrence ratio was 12.69%.DISCUSSION and CONCLUSION: A significant relationship between menopause and POP recurrence was determined.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2012 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

ABSTRACTINTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to assess the recurrence ratios of pelvic organ prolapse surgical repair.METHODS: Between June 2012 and May 2017, 126 nonrandomly selected women underwent pelvic organ prolapse surgical repair. We used POP-Q System for staging. The patients were divided into four groups as follows; anterior repair group (n=64), posterior repair group (n=29), anteriorposterior repair group (n=13), and vaginal cuff prolapse group (n=20).RESULTS: Mean age of the 126 patients was 58.5 ± 10.8 years (min. 42, max. 75), while mean weight was 70 ±12.7 kg (min. 48 kg, max. 92 kg) and mean parity was 3 (min. 0, max. 6). Our recurrence ratios were 8 patients (12.5%) in anteriorrepair group, 7 patients (24.1%) in posterior repair group, 1 patient (7.6%) in anterior-posterior repair group, and no patients in vaginal cuff prolapse group. In all cases, the overall recurrence ratio was 12.69%.DISCUSSION and CONCLUSION: A significant relationship between menopause and POP recurrence was determined. A significant relationship between surgical technique and recurrence free cases was also detected.

Özet

ÖZÖZ GİRİŞ ve AMAÇ: Bu çalışmanın amacı, pelvik organ prolapsusu cerrahi onarımının nüks oranlarını değerlendirmektir.YÖNTEM ve GEREÇLER: Haziran 2012 ile Mayıs 2017 tarihleri arasında rastgele seçilen 126 kadına pelvik organ prolapsusu cerrahi onarımı yapıldı. Evreleme için POP-Q Sistemini kullandık. Hastalar dört gruba ayrıldı; ön onarım grubu (n = 64), arka onarım grubu (n = 29), ön-arka onarım grubu (n = 13) ve vajen kubbe prolapsusu grubu (n = 20).BULGULAR: 126 hastanın yaş ortalaması 58.5 ± 10.8 yıl (en az 42, en fazla 75), ortalama ağırlık 70 ± 12.7 kg (en az 48 kg, en fazla 92 kg) ve ortalama parite 3 (en az 0, en fazla 6) idi. Nüks oranlarımız ön onarım grubunda 8 (%12.5), arka onarım grubunda 7 (%24.1), ön-arka onarım grubunda 1 (%7.6), vajen kubbe prolapsusu grubunda hiçbir hasta yok şeklinde idi. Tüm durumlarda, genel nüks oranı %12.69 idi.TARTIŞMA ve SONUÇ: Menopoz ile POP nüksü arasında anlamlı ilişki tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca cerrahi teknik ile nükssüz olgular arasında da anlamlı bir ilişki bulunmuştur

🔖

Cite This Article

SUKGEN, G., Türkay, Ü. (2022). Our Recurrence Ratios in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgical Repair. Kocaeli Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2, 1–7. https://ajindex.com/articles/574790

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Beckmann CRB, Ling FW, Barzansky BM, Herbert WNP, Laube DW, Smith RP. Obstetrics and gynecology. 6th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2010. Pelvic support defects, urinary incontinence, and urinary tract infection; 259- 67
  2. Padubidri VG, Daftary SN. Shaw’s textbook of gynecology. 16th ed. Haryana, India: Reed Elsevier India Private Limited; 2015. Genital prolapse; 349-64
  3. Persu C, Chapple CR, Cauni V, Gutue S, Geavlete P. Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POP-Q) - A New Era in Pelvic Prolapse Staging. J Med Life 2011; 4 (1): 75-81
  4. Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL. Epidemiology of Surgically Managed Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Urinary Incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 89 (4): 501–6. doi:10.1016/s0029- 7844(97)00058-6 5. Barber MD, Brubaker L, Nygaard I, Wheeler TL 2nd, Schaffer J, Chen Z, et al. Defining Success after Surgery for Pelvic Organ Prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 2009; 114 (3): 600-9
  5. Moore RD, Miklos JR. Vaginal Mesh Kits for Pelvic Organ Prolapse, Friend or Foe: A Comprehensive Review. The Scientific World Journal 2009; 9: 163- 189
  6. Vergeldt TFM, Weemhoff M, IntHout J. Kluivers KB. Risk Factors for Pelvic Organ Prolapse and its Recurrence: A Systemic Review. Int Urogynecol J. 2015; 26 (11): 1559–1573. doi: 10.1007/s00192-015-2695-8
  7. Kim CM, Jeon MJ, Chung DJ, Kim SK, Kim JW, Bai SW. Risk Factors for Pelvic Organ Prolapse. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2007; 98 (3): 248-51
  8. Whiteside JL, Weber AM, Meyn LA. Walters MD. Risk Factors for Prolapse Recurrence after Vaginal Repair. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 191 (5): 1533-8 10. Diez-Itza I, Aizpitarte I, Becerro A. Risk Factors for the Recurrence of Pelvic Organ Prolapse after Vaginal Surgery: A Review at 5 Years after Surgery. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007; 18 (11): 1317-24
  9. Vergeldt TF, Weemhoff M, IntHout J, Kluivers KB. Risk Factors for Pelvic Organ Prolapse and its Recurrence: A Systematic Review. Int Urogynecol J 2015; 26 (11): 1559-73
  10. Vergeldt TFM, Notten KJB, Kluivers KB, Weemhoff M. Recurrence Risk is Associated with Preoperatively Advanced Prolapse Stage: Is There a Difference Between Women with Stage 2 and Those with Stage 3 or 4 Cystocele? Int Urogynecol J. 2017; 28 (7): 983-7
  11. Halpern-Elenskaia K, Umek W, BodnerAdler B, Hanzal E. Anterior Colporrhaphy: A Standard Operation? Systematic Review of the Technical Aspects of a Common Procedure in Randomized Controlled Trials. Int Urogynecol J. 2018; 29: 7