Comparison of effectiveness of laparoscopic and transvaginal mesh operations in uterus protective surgery of women in reproductive-age with pelvic organ prolapse (stage ≥2).
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the efficiency of laparoscopic and transvaginal mesh operations with conservative surgery of reproductive-age women with pelvic organ prolapse (stage≥2) (POP).
Materials and Methods: In this study, we retrospectively evaluated 22 cases of 105 patients who diagnosed with symptomatic POP-Q stage 2 and above pelvic prolapse, part of whom underwent laparoscopic surgery (Group-1) while the other part composed of those who underwent transvaginal mesh (TVM) surgery (Group-2). Urogenital prolapse Pelvic Organ was graded using POP-Q.As the current TVM surgical kits four-arms mesh was used.
Results: The mean age of the patients of both groups was 42.2±11.4 and 38.3±12.8 years, respectively. The mean duration of hospitalization for the patients underwent laparoscopy was 2.3 days (range:1-4 days), that period was observed as 3 days in Group-2 (range:2-4 days). None of our patients had any adverse reactions in the early or late stages. The rate of success was 95.45% for patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery, while it was 98.10% for the group of TVM surgery.
Conclusion: Transvaginal mesh surgery was found to be a relatively successful technique in pelvic organ prolapse surgery owing to the high rate of success and minimal rates of complications.
Kaynakça
- 1. Constantini E, Porena M, Lazzeri M, Mearini L, Bini V, Zucchi A. Changes in female sexual function after pelvic organ prolapse repair. Int Urogynecol. J 2013;24:1481-7
- 2. El Haddad R, Svabik K, Masata J, Koleska T, Hubka P, Martan A. Women's quality of life and sexual function after transvaginal anterior repair with mesh insertion. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013;167(1):110-13.
- 3. Jarząbek-Bielecka G, Buks J, Witkowska J, Wilczak M, Pisarska-Krawczyk M, Kędzia W et al. Aging: Women sexual activity, pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Polski Przegląd Nauk o Zdrowiu. 2014;1 (38):25-8.
- 4. Pattel MS, Mellen C, O’ Sullivan DM, Lassala CA. Pessary use and impact on quality of life and body image. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2011; 17:298-301.
- 5. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Managing pelvic organ prolapse. In: Urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in women NICE guideline Draft. October 2018, p:24.
- 6. Zucchi A, Lazzeri M Porena M, Del Zingaro M, Costantini E. Uterus preservation in prolapse surgery. Nat Med. 2010; 7: 626–33.
- 7. Tola EN, Erdemoğlu E, Erdemoğlu E. Uterine sparing surgical methods in pelvic organ prolapse. Turk J Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 12(3): 168–72.
- 8. Walter JE. Transvaginal mesh procedures for pelvic organ prolapse. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2011; 33: 168–74
- 9. Rogo-Gupta L. Current trends in surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2013;25: 395-98
- 10. Acsinte OM, Rabischong B, Bourdel N, Canis M, Botchorishvili R. Laparoscopic Promontofixation in 10 Steps. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018;25(5):767.
