Comparison outcomes of three surgical procedures in treatment of severe pelvic organ prolapse and analysis of risk factors for genital prolapse recurrence
HU Chang-dong, CHEN Yi-song, YI Xiao-fang, DING Jing-xin, FENG Wei-wei, YAO Liang-qing, HUANG Jian, ZHANG Ying, HU Wei-guo, ZHU Zhi-ling, HUA Ke-qin
Published 2011-02-25
Cite as Chin J Obstet Gynecol, 2011,46(02): 94-100. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567x.2011.02.004
Abstract
Objective To investigate clinical significance and application of modified pelvic floor reconstruction developed by Peking Union Medical College Hospital ( MPFR ) in treatment of severe pelvic organ prolapse (POP) by comparing the effectiveness, quality of postoperative sexual life, life satisfaction and risk factors for POP recurrence with the following two surgical procedures: traditional total vaginal hysterectomy with anterior-posterior colporrhaphy (TVH-APC) and total vaginal hysterectomy with lateral colporrhaphy and sacrospinous ligament fixation and vaginal bridge repair and episiotomy (TVH-LC-SSLFVBR-EP). Methods Totally 173 patients with severe POP and at least two compartments defects of pelvic floor underwent surgeries in the study, 86 patients (group A) were treated by MPFR with polypropylene mesh application, 58 (group B) were treated by TVH-APC, and 29 patients (group C) were treated by TVH-LC-SSLF-VBR-EP. Peri-operative data and outcomes of postoperative courses at 6, 12, 18 months were collected and analyzed, in the meantime, the risk factors of recurrence were studied. Results (1) No statistical difference was observed among the above 3 groups in terms of length of operation, amount of blood loss, length of hospital stay, and morbidity after surgery ( P > 0.05). ( 2 ) Cost hospitalization was ( 11 448 ±3049) Yuan in group A, which was significantly higher than (7262 ± 1607) Yuan in group B and (7140 ± 1817 ) Yuan in group C (P < 0.05 ). (3) The length of vaginal cuff of (7.5 ± 1.4) cm in group A and ( 5.6 ± 1.1 ) cm in group C were significantly longer than (7.1±0.6) cm in group B ( P<0.05). The width of vaginal cuff of (4.3±0.3) cm in group A was larger than (3.4±0.3) cm in group B and (3.3±0.4) cm in group C (P<0.05). (4) The recurrence rate at 12 months after surgery was 12.8% (11/86)in group A, which was similar with 17.2%(5/29) in group C (P>0.05) and significantly less than 36.2% (21/58) in group B (P<0.05). The rate of active sexual life of 16.3% (14/86) in group A was significantly higher than 1.7% (1/58) in group B and 0 in group C ( P < 0. 05 ). The index of life quality improvement at 12 months after surgery was 48±12 in group A, which was no less than 53±16 in group C ( P>0.05) and higher than 27 ± 9 in group B ( P<0.05). (5 ) Mesh rejection was observed in 6 patients in group A within 3 months after surgery, while the posterior vaginal wall was exclusively involved. No difference was found in urinary retention or urinary incontinence among three groups (P >0. 05 ). (6) The severe degree of POP, type of surgical procedure ( TVT-APC), anterior compartment defect of pelvic floor,and early days of performing pelvic floor reconstruction surgeries were high risk factors for POP recurrence (P< 0.05). Conclusions MPFR has a better curative effect and lower recurrence rate on patients with POP. It can help patients regain integrity of anatomical structure and functions of pelvic floor. TVH-LCSSLF-VBR-EP is also effective.
Key words:
Uterine prolapse; Gynecologic surgical procedures; Treatment outcome; Recurrence
Contributor Information
HU Chang-dong
Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University,Shanghai 200011, China
CHEN Yi-song
Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University,Shanghai 200011, China
YI Xiao-fang
Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University,Shanghai 200011, China
DING Jing-xin
Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University,Shanghai 200011, China
FENG Wei-wei
Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University,Shanghai 200011, China
YAO Liang-qing
Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University,Shanghai 200011, China
HUANG Jian
Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University,Shanghai 200011, China
ZHANG Ying
Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University,Shanghai 200011, China
HU Wei-guo
Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University,Shanghai 200011, China
ZHU Zhi-ling
Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University,Shanghai 200011, China
HUA Ke-qin
Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University,Shanghai 200011, China