Loading…
Laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures or prolene meshes: a 3-year follow-up
Objective( s): To compare the long-term effectiveness of two different laparoscopic colposuspension procedures. Study design: Sixty women affected by genuine stress incontinence (GSI) were enrolled in a prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) and treated by transperitoneal laparoscopic colposu...
Saved in:
Published in: | European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology 2004-12, Vol.117 (2), p.201-203 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-99ef511dff35ec43bba3dbf5075a0775e113e870f23828dfa5158a3f95c120423 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-99ef511dff35ec43bba3dbf5075a0775e113e870f23828dfa5158a3f95c120423 |
container_end_page | 203 |
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 201 |
container_title | European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology |
container_volume | 117 |
creator | Zullo, Fulvio Palomba, Stefano Russo, Tiziana Sbano, Francesco Maria Falbo, Angela Morelli, Michele Pellicano, Massimilano Mastrantonio, Pasquale |
description | Objective(
s): To compare the long-term effectiveness of two different laparoscopic colposuspension procedures.
Study design: Sixty women affected by genuine stress incontinence (GSI) were enrolled in a prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) and treated by transperitoneal laparoscopic colposuspension using nonabsorbable sutures (group A) or prolene mesh fixed with tackers or staplers (group B). In each group the subjective and objective failure rates were evaluated at 12, 24, and 36 months after surgery. For the subjective evaluation patients were asked whether they had experienced urine leakage and any urine loss they reported was recorded on a visual analogue scale (VAS). The objective evaluation was performed by means of a clinical examination and multichannel urodynamic studies. The data were analyzed by the intention-to-treat method.
Results: The subjective failure rate was significantly (
P < 0.05) lower in group A than in group B at 12 months (3.3% versus 13.3%, respectively), 24 months (20.0% versus 36.7%, respectively), and 36 months (33.3% versus 53.3%, respectively) after surgery. The objective failure rate also differed significantly (
P < 0.05) between the two groups after 12 (10.7% versus 25.0% for group A and group B, respectively), 24 (29.6% versus 57.7%, respectively), and 36 (42.3% versus 61.5%, respectively) months of follow-up.
Conclusion(
s): Laparoscopic colposuspension performed with sutures is more effective than laparoscopic colposuspension accomplished with the use of prolene meshes in the long term, and the use of prolene meshes should be avoided in treatment of GSI. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2004.04.030 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67068282</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0301211504002623</els_id><sourcerecordid>67068282</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-99ef511dff35ec43bba3dbf5075a0775e113e870f23828dfa5158a3f95c120423</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1rGzEQhkVJqV23_yAEXdLbuvpY7co5BIJp04KhPTRnodWOHJn1aqPxNvjfR4sNvmUYGBDPO4weQq45W3LGq--7JeziNjVLwVi5nFqyD2TOdS2KulLlFZnnF14IztWMfEbcsVxSrj6RGVeq5FrpOfm7sYNNEV0cgqMudkPEEQfoMcSejhj6LcXxMCZAGhMdUuygB7oHfAa8o5bK4gg2UR-7Lr4W4_CFfPS2Q_h6ngvy9PPHv_WvYvPn8ff6YVM4qfWhWK3AK85b76UCV8qmsbJtvGK1sqyuFXAuQdfMC6mFbr1VXGkr_Uo5Llgp5IJ8O-3NJ72MgAezD-ig62wPcURT1azKyQksT6DL38QE3gwp7G06Gs7MZNLszMmkmUyaqSXLsZvz_rHZQ3sJndVl4PYMWHS288n2LuCFqyQTQlWZuz9xkG38D5AMugC9gzYkcAfTxvD-JW--4ZOJ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67068282</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures or prolene meshes: a 3-year follow-up</title><source>ScienceDirect Freedom Collection</source><creator>Zullo, Fulvio ; Palomba, Stefano ; Russo, Tiziana ; Sbano, Francesco Maria ; Falbo, Angela ; Morelli, Michele ; Pellicano, Massimilano ; Mastrantonio, Pasquale</creator><creatorcontrib>Zullo, Fulvio ; Palomba, Stefano ; Russo, Tiziana ; Sbano, Francesco Maria ; Falbo, Angela ; Morelli, Michele ; Pellicano, Massimilano ; Mastrantonio, Pasquale</creatorcontrib><description>Objective(
s): To compare the long-term effectiveness of two different laparoscopic colposuspension procedures.
Study design: Sixty women affected by genuine stress incontinence (GSI) were enrolled in a prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) and treated by transperitoneal laparoscopic colposuspension using nonabsorbable sutures (group A) or prolene mesh fixed with tackers or staplers (group B). In each group the subjective and objective failure rates were evaluated at 12, 24, and 36 months after surgery. For the subjective evaluation patients were asked whether they had experienced urine leakage and any urine loss they reported was recorded on a visual analogue scale (VAS). The objective evaluation was performed by means of a clinical examination and multichannel urodynamic studies. The data were analyzed by the intention-to-treat method.
Results: The subjective failure rate was significantly (
P < 0.05) lower in group A than in group B at 12 months (3.3% versus 13.3%, respectively), 24 months (20.0% versus 36.7%, respectively), and 36 months (33.3% versus 53.3%, respectively) after surgery. The objective failure rate also differed significantly (
P < 0.05) between the two groups after 12 (10.7% versus 25.0% for group A and group B, respectively), 24 (29.6% versus 57.7%, respectively), and 36 (42.3% versus 61.5%, respectively) months of follow-up.
Conclusion(
s): Laparoscopic colposuspension performed with sutures is more effective than laparoscopic colposuspension accomplished with the use of prolene meshes in the long term, and the use of prolene meshes should be avoided in treatment of GSI.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0301-2115</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-7654</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2004.04.030</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15541858</identifier><identifier>CODEN: EOGRAL</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Shannon: Elsevier Ireland Ltd</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Burch ; Colposcopy - methods ; Colposuspension ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Medical sciences ; Mesh ; Prospective Studies ; Surgical Mesh ; Suture ; Suture Techniques ; Treatment Outcome ; Urinary Incontinence, Stress - physiopathology ; Urinary Incontinence, Stress - surgery ; Urodynamics</subject><ispartof>European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology, 2004-12, Vol.117 (2), p.201-203</ispartof><rights>2004 Elsevier Ireland Ltd</rights><rights>2005 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-99ef511dff35ec43bba3dbf5075a0775e113e870f23828dfa5158a3f95c120423</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-99ef511dff35ec43bba3dbf5075a0775e113e870f23828dfa5158a3f95c120423</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=16302256$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15541858$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zullo, Fulvio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Palomba, Stefano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Russo, Tiziana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sbano, Francesco Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Falbo, Angela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morelli, Michele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pellicano, Massimilano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mastrantonio, Pasquale</creatorcontrib><title>Laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures or prolene meshes: a 3-year follow-up</title><title>European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology</title><addtitle>Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol</addtitle><description>Objective(
s): To compare the long-term effectiveness of two different laparoscopic colposuspension procedures.
Study design: Sixty women affected by genuine stress incontinence (GSI) were enrolled in a prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) and treated by transperitoneal laparoscopic colposuspension using nonabsorbable sutures (group A) or prolene mesh fixed with tackers or staplers (group B). In each group the subjective and objective failure rates were evaluated at 12, 24, and 36 months after surgery. For the subjective evaluation patients were asked whether they had experienced urine leakage and any urine loss they reported was recorded on a visual analogue scale (VAS). The objective evaluation was performed by means of a clinical examination and multichannel urodynamic studies. The data were analyzed by the intention-to-treat method.
Results: The subjective failure rate was significantly (
P < 0.05) lower in group A than in group B at 12 months (3.3% versus 13.3%, respectively), 24 months (20.0% versus 36.7%, respectively), and 36 months (33.3% versus 53.3%, respectively) after surgery. The objective failure rate also differed significantly (
P < 0.05) between the two groups after 12 (10.7% versus 25.0% for group A and group B, respectively), 24 (29.6% versus 57.7%, respectively), and 36 (42.3% versus 61.5%, respectively) months of follow-up.
Conclusion(
s): Laparoscopic colposuspension performed with sutures is more effective than laparoscopic colposuspension accomplished with the use of prolene meshes in the long term, and the use of prolene meshes should be avoided in treatment of GSI.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Burch</subject><subject>Colposcopy - methods</subject><subject>Colposuspension</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laparoscopy</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Mesh</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Surgical Mesh</subject><subject>Suture</subject><subject>Suture Techniques</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Urinary Incontinence, Stress - physiopathology</subject><subject>Urinary Incontinence, Stress - surgery</subject><subject>Urodynamics</subject><issn>0301-2115</issn><issn>1872-7654</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1rGzEQhkVJqV23_yAEXdLbuvpY7co5BIJp04KhPTRnodWOHJn1aqPxNvjfR4sNvmUYGBDPO4weQq45W3LGq--7JeziNjVLwVi5nFqyD2TOdS2KulLlFZnnF14IztWMfEbcsVxSrj6RGVeq5FrpOfm7sYNNEV0cgqMudkPEEQfoMcSejhj6LcXxMCZAGhMdUuygB7oHfAa8o5bK4gg2UR-7Lr4W4_CFfPS2Q_h6ngvy9PPHv_WvYvPn8ff6YVM4qfWhWK3AK85b76UCV8qmsbJtvGK1sqyuFXAuQdfMC6mFbr1VXGkr_Uo5Llgp5IJ8O-3NJ72MgAezD-ig62wPcURT1azKyQksT6DL38QE3gwp7G06Gs7MZNLszMmkmUyaqSXLsZvz_rHZQ3sJndVl4PYMWHS288n2LuCFqyQTQlWZuz9xkG38D5AMugC9gzYkcAfTxvD-JW--4ZOJ</recordid><startdate>20041201</startdate><enddate>20041201</enddate><creator>Zullo, Fulvio</creator><creator>Palomba, Stefano</creator><creator>Russo, Tiziana</creator><creator>Sbano, Francesco Maria</creator><creator>Falbo, Angela</creator><creator>Morelli, Michele</creator><creator>Pellicano, Massimilano</creator><creator>Mastrantonio, Pasquale</creator><general>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20041201</creationdate><title>Laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures or prolene meshes: a 3-year follow-up</title><author>Zullo, Fulvio ; Palomba, Stefano ; Russo, Tiziana ; Sbano, Francesco Maria ; Falbo, Angela ; Morelli, Michele ; Pellicano, Massimilano ; Mastrantonio, Pasquale</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-99ef511dff35ec43bba3dbf5075a0775e113e870f23828dfa5158a3f95c120423</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Burch</topic><topic>Colposcopy - methods</topic><topic>Colposuspension</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laparoscopy</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Mesh</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Surgical Mesh</topic><topic>Suture</topic><topic>Suture Techniques</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Urinary Incontinence, Stress - physiopathology</topic><topic>Urinary Incontinence, Stress - surgery</topic><topic>Urodynamics</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zullo, Fulvio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Palomba, Stefano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Russo, Tiziana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sbano, Francesco Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Falbo, Angela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morelli, Michele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pellicano, Massimilano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mastrantonio, Pasquale</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zullo, Fulvio</au><au>Palomba, Stefano</au><au>Russo, Tiziana</au><au>Sbano, Francesco Maria</au><au>Falbo, Angela</au><au>Morelli, Michele</au><au>Pellicano, Massimilano</au><au>Mastrantonio, Pasquale</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures or prolene meshes: a 3-year follow-up</atitle><jtitle>European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol</addtitle><date>2004-12-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>117</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>201</spage><epage>203</epage><pages>201-203</pages><issn>0301-2115</issn><eissn>1872-7654</eissn><coden>EOGRAL</coden><abstract>Objective(
s): To compare the long-term effectiveness of two different laparoscopic colposuspension procedures.
Study design: Sixty women affected by genuine stress incontinence (GSI) were enrolled in a prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) and treated by transperitoneal laparoscopic colposuspension using nonabsorbable sutures (group A) or prolene mesh fixed with tackers or staplers (group B). In each group the subjective and objective failure rates were evaluated at 12, 24, and 36 months after surgery. For the subjective evaluation patients were asked whether they had experienced urine leakage and any urine loss they reported was recorded on a visual analogue scale (VAS). The objective evaluation was performed by means of a clinical examination and multichannel urodynamic studies. The data were analyzed by the intention-to-treat method.
Results: The subjective failure rate was significantly (
P < 0.05) lower in group A than in group B at 12 months (3.3% versus 13.3%, respectively), 24 months (20.0% versus 36.7%, respectively), and 36 months (33.3% versus 53.3%, respectively) after surgery. The objective failure rate also differed significantly (
P < 0.05) between the two groups after 12 (10.7% versus 25.0% for group A and group B, respectively), 24 (29.6% versus 57.7%, respectively), and 36 (42.3% versus 61.5%, respectively) months of follow-up.
Conclusion(
s): Laparoscopic colposuspension performed with sutures is more effective than laparoscopic colposuspension accomplished with the use of prolene meshes in the long term, and the use of prolene meshes should be avoided in treatment of GSI.</abstract><cop>Shannon</cop><pub>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</pub><pmid>15541858</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ejogrb.2004.04.030</doi><tpages>3</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0301-2115 |
ispartof | European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology, 2004-12, Vol.117 (2), p.201-203 |
issn | 0301-2115 1872-7654 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67068282 |
source | ScienceDirect Freedom Collection |
subjects | Biological and medical sciences Burch Colposcopy - methods Colposuspension Female Follow-Up Studies Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics Humans Laparoscopy Medical sciences Mesh Prospective Studies Surgical Mesh Suture Suture Techniques Treatment Outcome Urinary Incontinence, Stress - physiopathology Urinary Incontinence, Stress - surgery Urodynamics |
title | Laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures or prolene meshes: a 3-year follow-up |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T12%3A44%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Laparoscopic%20colposuspension%20using%20sutures%20or%20prolene%20meshes:%20a%203-year%20follow-up&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20obstetrics%20&%20gynecology%20and%20reproductive%20biology&rft.au=Zullo,%20Fulvio&rft.date=2004-12-01&rft.volume=117&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=201&rft.epage=203&rft.pages=201-203&rft.issn=0301-2115&rft.eissn=1872-7654&rft.coden=EOGRAL&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2004.04.030&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67068282%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-99ef511dff35ec43bba3dbf5075a0775e113e870f23828dfa5158a3f95c120423%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=67068282&rft_id=info:pmid/15541858&rfr_iscdi=true |