{"title":"膀胱阴道瘘修补中耻骨尾骨吊带与耻骨颈筋膜再固定:回顾性回顾。","authors":"Rachel Pope, Prakash Ganesh, Jeffrey Wilkinson","doi":"10.1155/2018/6396387","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Urethral incontinence is an issue for approximately 10-15% of women with an obstetric fistula. Various surgical interventions to prevent this exist, including the pubococcygeal sling and refixation of the pubocervical fascia. Neither has been evaluated in comparison to one another. Therefore, this retrospective evaluation for superiority was performed. The primary outcome was urinary stress incontinence, and secondary outcomes were operative factors. There were 185 PC slings, but 12 were excluded because of urethral plications. There were 50 RPCF procedures, but 3 were excluded because of urethral plications. Finally, there were 32 cases with both PC sling and RPCF procedures. All groups demonstrated a higher than expected fistula repair rate with negative dye tests in 84% of the PC sling group, 89.9% in the RPCF group, and 93.8% in the RPCF and PC groups. There were no statistically significant differences found in continence status between the three groups. Of those who underwent PC slings, 49% were found to have residual stress incontinence. Of those who underwent RPCF, 47.8% had stress incontinence. Of those with both techniques, 43.8% had residual stress incontinence. Pad weight was not significantly different between the groups. As there is no statistically significant difference, we cannot recommend one procedure over the other as an anti-incontinence procedure. The use of both simultaneously is worth investigating.</p>","PeriodicalId":19439,"journal":{"name":"Obstetrics and Gynecology International","volume":"2018 ","pages":"6396387"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2018/6396387","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pubococcygeal Sling versus Refixation of the Pubocervical Fascia in Vesicovaginal Fistula Repair: A Retrospective Review.\",\"authors\":\"Rachel Pope, Prakash Ganesh, Jeffrey Wilkinson\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2018/6396387\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Urethral incontinence is an issue for approximately 10-15% of women with an obstetric fistula. Various surgical interventions to prevent this exist, including the pubococcygeal sling and refixation of the pubocervical fascia. Neither has been evaluated in comparison to one another. Therefore, this retrospective evaluation for superiority was performed. The primary outcome was urinary stress incontinence, and secondary outcomes were operative factors. There were 185 PC slings, but 12 were excluded because of urethral plications. There were 50 RPCF procedures, but 3 were excluded because of urethral plications. Finally, there were 32 cases with both PC sling and RPCF procedures. All groups demonstrated a higher than expected fistula repair rate with negative dye tests in 84% of the PC sling group, 89.9% in the RPCF group, and 93.8% in the RPCF and PC groups. There were no statistically significant differences found in continence status between the three groups. Of those who underwent PC slings, 49% were found to have residual stress incontinence. Of those who underwent RPCF, 47.8% had stress incontinence. Of those with both techniques, 43.8% had residual stress incontinence. Pad weight was not significantly different between the groups. As there is no statistically significant difference, we cannot recommend one procedure over the other as an anti-incontinence procedure. The use of both simultaneously is worth investigating.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19439,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Obstetrics and Gynecology International\",\"volume\":\"2018 \",\"pages\":\"6396387\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2018/6396387\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Obstetrics and Gynecology International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6396387\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2018/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obstetrics and Gynecology International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6396387","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Pubococcygeal Sling versus Refixation of the Pubocervical Fascia in Vesicovaginal Fistula Repair: A Retrospective Review.
Urethral incontinence is an issue for approximately 10-15% of women with an obstetric fistula. Various surgical interventions to prevent this exist, including the pubococcygeal sling and refixation of the pubocervical fascia. Neither has been evaluated in comparison to one another. Therefore, this retrospective evaluation for superiority was performed. The primary outcome was urinary stress incontinence, and secondary outcomes were operative factors. There were 185 PC slings, but 12 were excluded because of urethral plications. There were 50 RPCF procedures, but 3 were excluded because of urethral plications. Finally, there were 32 cases with both PC sling and RPCF procedures. All groups demonstrated a higher than expected fistula repair rate with negative dye tests in 84% of the PC sling group, 89.9% in the RPCF group, and 93.8% in the RPCF and PC groups. There were no statistically significant differences found in continence status between the three groups. Of those who underwent PC slings, 49% were found to have residual stress incontinence. Of those who underwent RPCF, 47.8% had stress incontinence. Of those with both techniques, 43.8% had residual stress incontinence. Pad weight was not significantly different between the groups. As there is no statistically significant difference, we cannot recommend one procedure over the other as an anti-incontinence procedure. The use of both simultaneously is worth investigating.
期刊介绍:
Obstetrics and Gynecology International is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that aims to provide a forum for scientists and clinical professionals working in obstetrics and gynecology. The journal publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies related to obstetrics, maternal-fetal medicine, general gynecology, gynecologic oncology, uro-gynecology, reproductive medicine and infertility, reproductive endocrinology, and sexual medicine.