Objective. This study aimed at comparing sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) with uterosacral and cardinal ligament fixation (USCLF) concerning complications and outcomes in patients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Methods. A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of patients with POP stage III or above uterine prolapse treated at Wenzhou People’s Hospital from January 2013 to December 2019. Patients were divided into two groups: USCLF group and SSLF group. The perioperative indicators, postoperative complications, pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q), Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (PFDI-20), and POP/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire-12 (PISQ-12) scores of the groups were analyzed and compared. Results. (1) The operative time and intraoperative blood loss in the USCLF group were lower than those in the SSLF group, with statistical significance ( p < 0.05 ). (2) The incidence of postoperative buttock pain in the SSLF group was 10.7% (6/56), higher than that in the USCLF group (0/56) (Fisher’s exact test, p = 0.027 ). (3) At one year of follow-up, significant improvement in Aa, Ba, C, Ap, and Bp values was observed in both groups ( p < 0.05 ). The values of the Aa and Ba sites in the USCLF group were lower than those in the SSLF group one year after surgery ( p < 0.05 ). (4) The PFDI-20 and PISQ-12 scores of the groups one year after surgery were lower than those before surgery ( p < 0.05 ). Conclusion. Uterosacral and cardinal ligament suture fixation leads to less bleeding and better postoperative quality of life than preoperative and may be better than SSLF at preventing the recurrence of anterior wall prolapse after surgery.
This study aims to search for a new, economic, convenient, and low recurrence rate operation for the surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The clinical value of the operation for treating POP was determined through retrospective case series. The new operation was called, pelvic autologous tissue reconstruction.Women with symptomatic uterine prolapse, who required surgery, were recruited. A total of 97 women [stage III to IV, according to POP quantification (POP-Q) staging] were collected from January 2010 to December 2016. Among these women, 61 women underwent a traditional operation (TO, vaginal hysterectomy and vaginal anterior and posterior wall repair), while the remaining women underwent pelvic autologous tissue reconstruction.First, there was no statistically significant difference in intraoperative blood loss, indwelling urethral catheter time, in-hospital time, and the time of passage of gas through the anus between the pelvic autologous reconstruction (PAR) and TO groups (P > .05). The average operation time in the PAR group was significantly longer than that in the TO group (P < .05). Second, ultrasonic parameters before and after the operation between the 2 groups were compared. The postoperative rotation angle of the urethra (UR), posterior vesicourethral angle (PVA), and bladder neck descent (BND) significantly decreased in the PAR group (P < .05). There was no statistically significant difference in UR between before and 12 months after surgery in the TO group (P > .05). Furthermore, BND increased in the TO group at 12 months after the operation, compared with that at 3 months after the operation (P < .05). There was no significant difference in PVA and UR before the surgery and at 3 and 12 months after the surgery between the 2 groups (P > .05). In addition, BND was significantly smaller in the PAR group than in the TO group at 3 and 12 months after the surgery (P < .05). Third, there was no statistically significant difference in PFIQ-7 and PISG-12 in both groups after surgery.The stability of the pelvic floor structure was better in the PAR group than in the TO group. Furthermore, PAR is better for preventing the occurrence of pelvic floor prolapse and stress urinary incontinence after surgery.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.