阴道铒激光与盆底肌锻炼治疗盆腔器官脱垂:随机对照试验。

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology Pub Date : 2024-10-26 DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2024.10.042
Ann-Sophie Page , Eline Borowski , Emma Bauters , Susanne Housmans , Frank Van der Aa , Jan Deprest
{"title":"阴道铒激光与盆底肌锻炼治疗盆腔器官脱垂:随机对照试验。","authors":"Ann-Sophie Page ,&nbsp;Eline Borowski ,&nbsp;Emma Bauters ,&nbsp;Susanne Housmans ,&nbsp;Frank Van der Aa ,&nbsp;Jan Deprest","doi":"10.1016/j.ejogrb.2024.10.042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>To compare the efficacy of Er:YAG laser for mild to moderate pelvic organ prolapse (POP) to that of pelvic floor exercises (PFE).</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Single center randomised controlled trial.</div></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><div>Tertiary center, Belgium.</div></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><div>Forty-six women with mild to moderate prolapse were enrolled (23 in each group). There were no missing data for the primary outcome; three patients were lost to follow-up at 24-months.</div></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><div>Comparison of vaginal laser treatment (3–6 applications) to PFE (9–18 sessions).</div></div><div><h3>Main outcome measures</h3><div>Subjective change in prolapse symptoms at four months from baseline measured by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory-6 (POPDI-6) (primary), adverse events, other subjective outcomes and independent anatomical assessment up to 24 months.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The mean difference in POPDI-6 scores at 4 months was 1.09 (95 %CI = −6.02;8.12), showing non-inferiority of laser to PFE (p = 0.004). Within groups, the difference in mean POPDI-6 four months following the start of therapy tended to be lower for laser-treatment (65.2 % (15/23) of laser-participants were ‘better’ or ‘much better’) than for PFE (60.9 % (14/23) in the PFE group), yet without difference between groups (OR = 1.21; 95 %CI = 0.39–3.23). There were no obvious between group differences in any other subjective nor objective outcomes. At 24 months, 50 % (11/22) of laser-patients and 43 % (9/21) of PFE-patients requested additional, yet alternative treatment. There were no serious adverse events at any time-point.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Vaginal laser application and PFE improve symptoms of mild and moderate prolapse to a similar extent. Both treatments had a measurable yet not durable effect. There were no adverse events in either arm.</div></div><div><h3>Trial registration</h3><div><span><span>ClinicalTrials.gov</span><svg><path></path></svg></span>(NCT04523298).</div></div><div><h3>Funding</h3><div>The laser device was provided by Fotona, Slovenia for the duration of this trial.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11975,"journal":{"name":"European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology","volume":"303 ","pages":"Pages 165-170"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Vaginal erbium laser versus pelvic floor exercises for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: A randomised controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"Ann-Sophie Page ,&nbsp;Eline Borowski ,&nbsp;Emma Bauters ,&nbsp;Susanne Housmans ,&nbsp;Frank Van der Aa ,&nbsp;Jan Deprest\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejogrb.2024.10.042\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>To compare the efficacy of Er:YAG laser for mild to moderate pelvic organ prolapse (POP) to that of pelvic floor exercises (PFE).</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Single center randomised controlled trial.</div></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><div>Tertiary center, Belgium.</div></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><div>Forty-six women with mild to moderate prolapse were enrolled (23 in each group). There were no missing data for the primary outcome; three patients were lost to follow-up at 24-months.</div></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><div>Comparison of vaginal laser treatment (3–6 applications) to PFE (9–18 sessions).</div></div><div><h3>Main outcome measures</h3><div>Subjective change in prolapse symptoms at four months from baseline measured by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory-6 (POPDI-6) (primary), adverse events, other subjective outcomes and independent anatomical assessment up to 24 months.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The mean difference in POPDI-6 scores at 4 months was 1.09 (95 %CI = −6.02;8.12), showing non-inferiority of laser to PFE (p = 0.004). Within groups, the difference in mean POPDI-6 four months following the start of therapy tended to be lower for laser-treatment (65.2 % (15/23) of laser-participants were ‘better’ or ‘much better’) than for PFE (60.9 % (14/23) in the PFE group), yet without difference between groups (OR = 1.21; 95 %CI = 0.39–3.23). There were no obvious between group differences in any other subjective nor objective outcomes. At 24 months, 50 % (11/22) of laser-patients and 43 % (9/21) of PFE-patients requested additional, yet alternative treatment. There were no serious adverse events at any time-point.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Vaginal laser application and PFE improve symptoms of mild and moderate prolapse to a similar extent. Both treatments had a measurable yet not durable effect. There were no adverse events in either arm.</div></div><div><h3>Trial registration</h3><div><span><span>ClinicalTrials.gov</span><svg><path></path></svg></span>(NCT04523298).</div></div><div><h3>Funding</h3><div>The laser device was provided by Fotona, Slovenia for the duration of this trial.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology\",\"volume\":\"303 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 165-170\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301211524005888\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301211524005888","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较 Er:YAG 激光治疗轻度和中度盆腔器官脱垂的疗效:比较Er:YAG激光治疗轻中度盆腔器官脱垂(POP)与盆底肌锻炼(PFE)的疗效:设计:单中心随机对照试验:设计:单中心随机对照试验:46名患有轻度至中度脱垂的妇女参加了试验(每组23人)。主要结果无数据缺失;3名患者在24个月后失去随访机会:主要结果测量指标:通过盆腔脏器脱垂压力量表-6(POPDI-6)测量四个月后脱垂症状与基线相比的主观变化(主要)、不良事件、其他主观结果以及24个月的独立解剖学评估:4个月时,POPDI-6评分的平均差异为1.09(95 %CI = -6.02;8.12),显示激光疗法与PFE疗法相比无劣效(p = 0.004)。在组内,治疗开始四个月后的平均 POPDI-6 差异,激光治疗组(65.2%(15/23)的激光治疗参与者 "更好 "或 "好得多")往往低于 PFE 治疗组(PFE 组为 60.9%(14/23)),但组间无差异(OR = 1.21;95 %CI = 0.39-3.23)。在其他主观或客观结果方面,组间无明显差异。24 个月时,50% 的激光治疗患者(11/22)和 43% 的 PFE 治疗患者(9/21)要求进行其他治疗。在任何时间点均未发生严重不良事件:结论:阴道激光疗法和PFE疗法对轻度和中度脱垂症状的改善程度相似。结论:阴道激光疗法和PFE疗法对轻度和中度脱垂症状的改善程度相似,两种疗法都有可测量但不持久的效果。两组治疗均未出现不良反应:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT04523298):激光设备由斯洛文尼亚 Fotona 公司在试验期间提供。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Vaginal erbium laser versus pelvic floor exercises for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: A randomised controlled trial

Objectives

To compare the efficacy of Er:YAG laser for mild to moderate pelvic organ prolapse (POP) to that of pelvic floor exercises (PFE).

Design

Single center randomised controlled trial.

Setting

Tertiary center, Belgium.

Participants

Forty-six women with mild to moderate prolapse were enrolled (23 in each group). There were no missing data for the primary outcome; three patients were lost to follow-up at 24-months.

Interventions

Comparison of vaginal laser treatment (3–6 applications) to PFE (9–18 sessions).

Main outcome measures

Subjective change in prolapse symptoms at four months from baseline measured by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory-6 (POPDI-6) (primary), adverse events, other subjective outcomes and independent anatomical assessment up to 24 months.

Results

The mean difference in POPDI-6 scores at 4 months was 1.09 (95 %CI = −6.02;8.12), showing non-inferiority of laser to PFE (p = 0.004). Within groups, the difference in mean POPDI-6 four months following the start of therapy tended to be lower for laser-treatment (65.2 % (15/23) of laser-participants were ‘better’ or ‘much better’) than for PFE (60.9 % (14/23) in the PFE group), yet without difference between groups (OR = 1.21; 95 %CI = 0.39–3.23). There were no obvious between group differences in any other subjective nor objective outcomes. At 24 months, 50 % (11/22) of laser-patients and 43 % (9/21) of PFE-patients requested additional, yet alternative treatment. There were no serious adverse events at any time-point.

Conclusions

Vaginal laser application and PFE improve symptoms of mild and moderate prolapse to a similar extent. Both treatments had a measurable yet not durable effect. There were no adverse events in either arm.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT04523298).

Funding

The laser device was provided by Fotona, Slovenia for the duration of this trial.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
3.80%
发文量
898
审稿时长
8.3 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology is the leading general clinical journal covering the continent. It publishes peer reviewed original research articles, as well as a wide range of news, book reviews, biographical, historical and educational articles and a lively correspondence section. Fields covered include obstetrics, prenatal diagnosis, maternal-fetal medicine, perinatology, general gynecology, gynecologic oncology, uro-gynecology, reproductive medicine, infertility, reproductive endocrinology, sexual medicine and reproductive ethics. The European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology provides a forum for scientific and clinical professional communication in obstetrics and gynecology throughout Europe and the world.
期刊最新文献
Corrigendum to "Mode of delivery predicts postpartum maternal leukocyte telomere length" [Eur. J. Obstetr. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 300 (2024) 224-229]. Corrigendum to “Recombinant-Luteinzing hormone supplementation in women during IVF/ICSI cycles with GnRH-antagonist protocol: A systematic review and meta-analysis” [Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 283 (2023) 43–48] Comparative study on the effects of combined oral contraceptives and dienogest in women with endometriosis‑associated chronic pelvic pain Severe uterine haemorrhagic complications from gestational trophoblastic neoplasia Prediction of perinatal mortality in early-onset fetal growth restriction: A post hoc analysis of the Dutch STRIDER trial to predict perinatal mortality in early-onset fetal growth restriction
×
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:481959085
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