No abstract

For many years, researchers on this field have suffered from the lack of an efficient method for describing pelvic organ prolapse. Struggling to solve this problem, the International Continence Society has proposed a pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) system [Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, Shull B, Smith ARB, Am J Obstet Gynecol, 175(1):1956-1962, 1996], which was validated as a precise and reproducible technique for describing pelvic organ position. However, even though very precise at describing pelvic organ position, our critic to this system is its limited ability to quantify the prolapse itself, since it still classifies prolapse into four grades, almost the same way as Baden and Walker did in 1972. As a result, the same grade can include a wide prolapse intensity range. The objective of this paper is to propose a method that makes POP research more efficient by directly measuring prolapse as a continuous variable that requires lesser number of subjects in order to achieve statistical significance.

Methods Methods: we applied the Kings Health Questionnaire (KHQ) for quality of life, gynecological examination, urinalysis I and urine culture approximately seven days prior to the urodynamic study (UDS) and the one-hour PAD test in patients undergoing making aponeurotic sling with its passing through the retropubic route with direct visualization of the needle, PAD test and King's Helth Questionnaire before and after surgery. Results Results ResultsResults Results: The mean age was 50.6 years, BMI of 28 and Leak Pressure (LP) 58,5cm H 2 O; 89% were Caucasian. Forty-six of them were monitored for three and six months, 43 for 12 months. The objective cure rate at 12 months postoperatively was approximately 93.5%. In evaluating quality of life, we observed a significant improvement in 12 months postoperatively compared with the preoperative period. There was no no urethral/bladder injury. As adverse results, we had one persistent urinary retention (2.3%), who was submitted to urethrolysis, currently without incontinence. Conclusion Conclusion Conclusion Conclusion Conclusion: The proposed procedure is safe as for the risk of bladder or urethral injuries, promoting significant improvement in quality of life and objective cure.

Estudo urodinâmico da pressão de perda ao esforço, nas posições ortostática e sentada, em mulheres com incontinência urinária (99,8 ± 33,3 versus 102,9 ± 32,4; respectivamente, posição sentada e em pé, p<0,05). Linear regression test based on frequency analyses was applied with the purpose to verify the patient percentage allocated in confi dence interval in terms of Valsalva leak point pressure in seating or orthostatic positions. A rate of 90.6% of compatibility was gotten in these results. When three unities were added to VLPP values after urodynamic investigation in seating position, it was noted that 92.2% of patients was included in this interval. CONCLUSIONS: these fi ndings suggest that the urodynamic investigation can be realized in seating position without diagnostic a therapeutic impairment allowing higher comfort to the patients.