Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

A retrospective comparison of abdominal sacrocolpopexy with Burch colposuspension versus sacrospinous fixation with transvaginal needle suspension for the management of vaginal vault prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence.
Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 1999; 10(6):390-3.IU

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the surgical outcome of abdominal sacrocolpopexy and Burch colposuspension with sacrospinous fixation and transvaginal needle suspension in the management of vaginal vault prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence. One hundred and seventeen women with vaginal vault prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence were surgically managed over a 7-year period. The first 61 consecutive women who underwent sacrospinous fixation and transvaginal needle suspension comprised the vaginal group, and the following 56 consecutive women who underwent abdominal sacrocolpopexy and Burch colposuspension comprised the abdominal group. Office records were reviewed to assess the presence of recurrent prolapse and urinary incontinence during postoperative follow-up. Objective follow-up was available for 101 women. Mean duration of follow-up was 24.0 +/- 15 months for the vaginal group, and 23.1 +/- 12.6 months for the abdominal group. The incidence of recurrent prolapse to or beyond the hymen (33% vs. 19%, P=0.0505) and lower urinary tract symptoms (26% vs. 13%, P = 0.0506) were significantly higher in the vaginal group than in the abdominal group. Our data suggest that the combined abdominal approach has a lower incidence of recurrent prolapse and lower urinary tract symptoms than the combined vaginal approach in managing vaginal vault prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Sze EH
Good Samaritan Hospital, University of Cincinnati, Ohio 45220, USA.
Kohli N
No affiliation info available
Miklos JR
No affiliation info available
Roat T
No affiliation info available
Karram MM
No affiliation info available

MeSH

AdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeUrinary Incontinence, StressUrologic Surgical ProceduresUterine Prolapse

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

10614976

Citation

Sze, E H., et al. "A Retrospective Comparison of Abdominal Sacrocolpopexy With Burch Colposuspension Versus Sacrospinous Fixation With Transvaginal Needle Suspension for the Management of Vaginal Vault Prolapse and Coexisting Stress Incontinence." International Urogynecology Journal and Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, vol. 10, no. 6, 1999, pp. 390-3.
Sze EH, Kohli N, Miklos JR, et al. A retrospective comparison of abdominal sacrocolpopexy with Burch colposuspension versus sacrospinous fixation with transvaginal needle suspension for the management of vaginal vault prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 1999;10(6):390-3.
Sze, E. H., Kohli, N., Miklos, J. R., Roat, T., & Karram, M. M. (1999). A retrospective comparison of abdominal sacrocolpopexy with Burch colposuspension versus sacrospinous fixation with transvaginal needle suspension for the management of vaginal vault prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence. International Urogynecology Journal and Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, 10(6), 390-3.
Sze EH, et al. A Retrospective Comparison of Abdominal Sacrocolpopexy With Burch Colposuspension Versus Sacrospinous Fixation With Transvaginal Needle Suspension for the Management of Vaginal Vault Prolapse and Coexisting Stress Incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 1999;10(6):390-3. PubMed PMID: 10614976.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - A retrospective comparison of abdominal sacrocolpopexy with Burch colposuspension versus sacrospinous fixation with transvaginal needle suspension for the management of vaginal vault prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence. AU - Sze,E H, AU - Kohli,N, AU - Miklos,J R, AU - Roat,T, AU - Karram,M M, PY - 1999/12/30/pubmed PY - 1999/12/30/medline PY - 1999/12/30/entrez SP - 390 EP - 3 JF - International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction JO - Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct VL - 10 IS - 6 N2 - The objective of this study was to compare the surgical outcome of abdominal sacrocolpopexy and Burch colposuspension with sacrospinous fixation and transvaginal needle suspension in the management of vaginal vault prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence. One hundred and seventeen women with vaginal vault prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence were surgically managed over a 7-year period. The first 61 consecutive women who underwent sacrospinous fixation and transvaginal needle suspension comprised the vaginal group, and the following 56 consecutive women who underwent abdominal sacrocolpopexy and Burch colposuspension comprised the abdominal group. Office records were reviewed to assess the presence of recurrent prolapse and urinary incontinence during postoperative follow-up. Objective follow-up was available for 101 women. Mean duration of follow-up was 24.0 +/- 15 months for the vaginal group, and 23.1 +/- 12.6 months for the abdominal group. The incidence of recurrent prolapse to or beyond the hymen (33% vs. 19%, P=0.0505) and lower urinary tract symptoms (26% vs. 13%, P = 0.0506) were significantly higher in the vaginal group than in the abdominal group. Our data suggest that the combined abdominal approach has a lower incidence of recurrent prolapse and lower urinary tract symptoms than the combined vaginal approach in managing vaginal vault prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence. UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/10614976/A_retrospective_comparison_of_abdominal_sacrocolpopexy_with_Burch_colposuspension_versus_sacrospinous_fixation_with_transvaginal_needle_suspension_for_the_management_of_vaginal_vault_prolapse_and_coexisting_stress_incontinence_ L2 - http://www.diseaseinfosearch.org/result/3797 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -