Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSanses, Tatiana V. D.
dc.contributor.authorShahryarinejad, Azin
dc.contributor.authorMolden, Stephanie
dc.contributor.authorHoskey, Kay A.
dc.contributor.authorAbbasy, Shameem
dc.contributor.authorPatterson, Danielle
dc.contributor.authorSaks, Emily K.
dc.contributor.authorWeber Lebrun, Emily Elise
dc.contributor.authorGamble, Tondalaya L.
dc.contributor.authorKing, Virginia G.
dc.contributor.authorNguyen, Aimee L.
dc.contributor.authorAbed, Husam
dc.contributor.authorYoung, Stephen B.
dc.date2022-08-11T08:10:06.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T16:55:42Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T16:55:42Z
dc.date.issued2009-11-01
dc.date.submitted2011-07-06
dc.identifier.citationAm J Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Nov;201(5):519.e1-8. Epub 2009 Aug 28. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2009.07.004">Link to article on publisher's site</a>
dc.identifier.issn0002-9378 (Linking)
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ajog.2009.07.004
dc.identifier.pmid19716533
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/42765
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare apical support anatomic outcomes following vaginal mesh procedure (VMP) (Prolift) to uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS) and abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC). STUDY DESIGN: This multicenter, retrospective chart review compared apical anatomic success (stage 0 or 1 based on point C or D of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification), level of vaginal apex (point C or D) 3-6 months after prolapse repair at 10 US centers between 2004 and 2007. RESULTS: VMP, USLS, and ASC were performed for 206, 231, and 305 subjects respectively. There was no difference in apical success after VMP (98.8%) compared with USLS (99.1%) or ASC (99.3%) (both P = 1.00) 3-6 months after surgery. The average elevation of the vaginal apex was lower after VMP (-6.9 cm) than USLS (-8.05 cm) and ASC (-8.5 cm) (both P < .001) CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing VMP have similar apical success compared with USLS and ASC despite lower vaginal apex 3-6 month after surgery.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=19716533&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a>
dc.relation.urlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2009.07.004
dc.subjectAged
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectGynecologic Surgical Procedures
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectMiddle Aged
dc.subjectPelvic Organ Prolapse
dc.subjectRetrospective Studies
dc.subject*Suburethral Slings
dc.subject*Surgical Mesh
dc.subjectTreatment Outcome
dc.subjectObstetrics and Gynecology
dc.titleAnatomic outcomes of vaginal mesh procedure (Prolift) compared with uterosacral ligament suspension and abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a Fellows' Pelvic Research Network study
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology
dc.source.volume201
dc.source.issue5
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/obgyn_pp/12
dc.identifier.contextkey2087924
html.description.abstract<p>OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare apical support anatomic outcomes following vaginal mesh procedure (VMP) (Prolift) to uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS) and abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC).</p> <p>STUDY DESIGN: This multicenter, retrospective chart review compared apical anatomic success (stage 0 or 1 based on point C or D of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification), level of vaginal apex (point C or D) 3-6 months after prolapse repair at 10 US centers between 2004 and 2007.</p> <p>RESULTS: VMP, USLS, and ASC were performed for 206, 231, and 305 subjects respectively. There was no difference in apical success after VMP (98.8%) compared with USLS (99.1%) or ASC (99.3%) (both P = 1.00) 3-6 months after surgery. The average elevation of the vaginal apex was lower after VMP (-6.9 cm) than USLS (-8.05 cm) and ASC (-8.5 cm) (both P < .001)</p> <p>CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing VMP have similar apical success compared with USLS and ASC despite lower vaginal apex 3-6 month after surgery.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathobgyn_pp/12
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology
dc.source.pages519.e1-8


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Publisher version

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record