Long-Term Outcome of Anterior-Apical Mesh (Surelift) Versus Anterior Colporrhaphy and Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation in Advanced Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY International Urogynecology Journal Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-15 DOI:10.1007/s00192-025-06105-1
Tsia-Shu Lo, Louiza Erika Rellora, Eyal Rom, Huan-Ka Chiung, Chia-Hsuan Yang, Yi-Hao Lin
{"title":"Long-Term Outcome of Anterior-Apical Mesh (Surelift) Versus Anterior Colporrhaphy and Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation in Advanced Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery.","authors":"Tsia-Shu Lo, Louiza Erika Rellora, Eyal Rom, Huan-Ka Chiung, Chia-Hsuan Yang, Yi-Hao Lin","doi":"10.1007/s00192-025-06105-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study first aims to compare the outcomes of Surelift (anterior-apical transvaginal mesh) and sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSF) with anterior repair using objective and subjective cure rates. Second, to compare the quality of life and its major and minor complications.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A retrospective study was conducted between December 2011 and January 2020. Patients with symptomatic stage ≥ 3 anterior or apical prolapse were included. Those who had prior POP mesh and who were unfit for surgery were excluded. Preoperative evaluation included history and physical exam, urodynamic studies, and validated questionnaires (IIQ-7, UDI-6, POPDI-6) at baseline, 1, 3, and 5 years later.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred eighty-one patients were included: 98 underwent anterior-apical transvaginal mesh and 83 had SSF with anterior colporrhaphy (SSF+A). Anterior-apical transvaginal mesh and SSF+A patients had mean follow-up periods of 83.5 ± 6.1 and 91.6 ± 39 months, respectively. At 1 year, no statistically significant difference was noted in objective and subjective cure rates between anterior-apical transvaginal mesh (96.8% and 94.7%) and SSF+A (89.9% and 88.6%). However, after 3 and 5 years, anterior-apical transvaginal mesh showed superior results with objective cure rates of 94.1% and 89.1%, respectively, compared to 80% and 64.4% for SSF+A (p = 0.008). At 3 and 5 years, anterior-apical transvaginal mesh had 92.9% and 85.9% subjective cure rates compared to SSF's 77.1% and 60%, respectively (p = 0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The long-term follow-up showed that native tissue repair was strongly associated with increased risk of recurrence compared to the anterior-apical mesh with minor complications in both groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":14355,"journal":{"name":"International Urogynecology Journal","volume":" ","pages":"857-866"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urogynecology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-025-06105-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study first aims to compare the outcomes of Surelift (anterior-apical transvaginal mesh) and sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSF) with anterior repair using objective and subjective cure rates. Second, to compare the quality of life and its major and minor complications.

Material and methods: A retrospective study was conducted between December 2011 and January 2020. Patients with symptomatic stage ≥ 3 anterior or apical prolapse were included. Those who had prior POP mesh and who were unfit for surgery were excluded. Preoperative evaluation included history and physical exam, urodynamic studies, and validated questionnaires (IIQ-7, UDI-6, POPDI-6) at baseline, 1, 3, and 5 years later.

Results: One hundred eighty-one patients were included: 98 underwent anterior-apical transvaginal mesh and 83 had SSF with anterior colporrhaphy (SSF+A). Anterior-apical transvaginal mesh and SSF+A patients had mean follow-up periods of 83.5 ± 6.1 and 91.6 ± 39 months, respectively. At 1 year, no statistically significant difference was noted in objective and subjective cure rates between anterior-apical transvaginal mesh (96.8% and 94.7%) and SSF+A (89.9% and 88.6%). However, after 3 and 5 years, anterior-apical transvaginal mesh showed superior results with objective cure rates of 94.1% and 89.1%, respectively, compared to 80% and 64.4% for SSF+A (p = 0.008). At 3 and 5 years, anterior-apical transvaginal mesh had 92.9% and 85.9% subjective cure rates compared to SSF's 77.1% and 60%, respectively (p = 0.005).

Conclusions: The long-term follow-up showed that native tissue repair was strongly associated with increased risk of recurrence compared to the anterior-apical mesh with minor complications in both groups.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在晚期盆腔器官脱垂手术中,前根尖补片(Surelift)与前阴道破裂和骶棘韧带固定的远期疗效。
目的:本研究首先旨在通过客观和主观治愈率,比较 Surelift(经阴道前腹部网片)和骶棘韧带固定术(SSF)与前路修补术的疗效。其次,比较生活质量及其主要和次要并发症:2011年12月至2020年1月期间进行了一项回顾性研究。研究对象包括症状≥3期的前脱垂或顶端脱垂患者。曾使用过 POP 网片且不适合手术的患者被排除在外。术前评估包括病史和体格检查、尿动力学检查以及基线、1年、3年和5年后的有效问卷(IIQ-7、UDI-6、POPDI-6):结果:共纳入 181 名患者:结果:共纳入了 181 名患者:98 人接受了前腹壁经阴道网切术,83 人接受了前结肠切除术(SSF+A)。经阴道前端网片和 SSF+A 患者的平均随访时间分别为 83.5 ± 6.1 个月和 91.6 ± 39 个月。1 年后,前腹腔经阴道网片(96.8% 和 94.7%)和 SSF+A (89.9% 和 88.6%)的客观和主观治愈率无明显统计学差异。然而,3 年和 5 年后,前腹腔经阴道网片显示出更优越的效果,客观治愈率分别为 94.1% 和 89.1%,而 SSF+A 的客观治愈率分别为 80% 和 64.4%(p = 0.008)。3年和5年后,经阴道前腹壁网片的主观治愈率分别为92.9%和85.9%,而SSF的主观治愈率分别为77.1%和60%(P = 0.005):长期随访结果显示,与前腹腔网片相比,原生组织修复与复发风险增加密切相关,但两组的并发症均较少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
22.20%
发文量
406
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Urogynecology Journal is the official journal of the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA).The International Urogynecology Journal has evolved in response to a perceived need amongst the clinicians, scientists, and researchers active in the field of urogynecology and pelvic floor disorders. Gynecologists, urologists, physiotherapists, nurses and basic scientists require regular means of communication within this field of pelvic floor dysfunction to express new ideas and research, and to review clinical practice in the diagnosis and treatment of women with disorders of the pelvic floor. This Journal has adopted the peer review process for all original contributions and will maintain high standards with regard to the research published therein. The clinical approach to urogynecology and pelvic floor disorders will be emphasized with each issue containing clinically relevant material that will be immediately applicable for clinical medicine. This publication covers all aspects of the field in an interdisciplinary fashion
期刊最新文献
Effectiveness of Intensive Preoperative Pelvic Floor Muscle Training in Women with Stress Urinary Incontinence Awaiting Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Bridging Gaps: Insights from a Rectal Buttonhole Tear Case Series. Primary Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse in Women Aged Over 80 Years: Pessary Versus Surgery. Fear, Shame, and Miscommunication: A Qualitative Study on Treatment Choice for Pelvic Organ Prolapse. Response to the Letter to the Editor on "Childhood Stress Urinary Incontinence in High-Impact Gymnasts: Does it Affect Their Future Risk of Adult SUI?"
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1