收稿日期: 2024-01-12
网络出版日期: 2024-06-14
基金资助
河南省科技攻关计划项目(162102310022)
The clinical effect of Tension⁃free laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh for pelvic organ prolapse
Received date: 2024-01-12
Online published: 2024-06-14
目的 观察经腹壁人工网片无张力双侧顶端悬吊盆底重建术的临床疗效。 方法 选取2021年3月1日至2023年10月31日在河南省人民医院因盆腔脏器脱垂行经腹壁人工网片无张力双侧顶端悬吊盆底重建术的患者作为观察组,共85例,同期行腹腔镜下骶骨固定术后的患者40例作为对照组,并分为保留子宫组、切除子宫组两个亚组。随访至2024年4月30日,分析其手术情况和术后并发症,并采用盆腔器官脱垂定量分期法(POP-Q)、盆底功能障碍性疾病症状问卷及其分量表(PFDI-20)、排尿困扰量表(UDI-6)、结直肠肛门困扰量表(CRADI-8)和盆腔器官脱垂困扰量表(POPDI-6)、盆底疾病生活质量影响问卷短表(PFIQ-7),盆腔器官脱垂/尿失禁性生活问卷(PISQ-12)对患者术前、术后治疗效果和生活质量进行组内及组间比较。 结果 观察组患者中位随访时间13.13个月,客观治愈率96.47%,再次手术率1.18%,围手术期并发症发生率为6.45%(切除子宫)、4.35%(保留子宫),网片暴露率1.61%(切除子宫)。对照组患者中位随访时间13.76个月,客观治愈率92.5%,再次手术率2.5%,围手术期并发症发生率为14.71%(切除子宫)、33.33%(保留子宫),网片暴露率8.82%(切除子宫)。观察组与对照组相比,客观治愈率、再次手术率无差异,观察组的手术时间短、出血少、术后排气快、住院时间短、围手术期并发症发生率低、网片暴露率低,尤其是保留子宫的患者,优势更明显。观察组和对照组患者组内比较时,术后1年与术前POP-Q的各指示点均明显改善(P < 0.05),术后PFDI-20、UDI-6、CRADI-8、POPDI-6、PFIQ-7、PISQ-12量表评分均较术前明显降低,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05),但在进行组间比较时,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。 结论 经腹壁人工网片无张力双侧顶端悬吊盆底重建术是治疗前、中盆腔脱垂的一种有效手术方案,可明显改善患者脱垂症状,提高患者生活质量,与骶骨固定术有相似的临床效果,尤其适用于保留子宫的患者。
关键词: 前、中盆腔器官脱垂; 经腹壁人工网片无张力双侧顶端悬吊盆底重建术; 腹腔镜下骶骨固定术; 临床疗效
李娜 , 王朕华 , 牛倩倩 , 陈贵芹 , 罗穗豫 , 董黎 . 经腹壁人工网片无张力双侧顶端悬吊盆底重建术的疗效分析[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2024 , 40(12) : 1683 -1689 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-5725.2024.12.012
Objective To evaluate the clinical effect of Tension-free laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. Methods A total of 85 patients who underwent pelvic organ prolapse were selected as the study group, and 40 patients underwent Laparoscopic sacral fixation surgery(LSC) as the control group in Henan Provincial People's Hospital from March 1, 2021 to October 31, 2023. The patients were divided into two subgroups: uterine preservation group and uterine resection group and followed up until April 30, 2024. The intraoperative conditions and postoperative complications were recorded and analyzed. POP quantitative staging(POP-Q)scores were used for evaluation. Preoperative and postoperative quality of life and therapeutic effect were evaluated using the pelvic floor distress inventory short form-20(PFDI-20), urinary distress inventory-6 (UDI-6), colorectal-anal distress inventory-8 (CRADI-8), pelvic organ prolapse distress inventory-6(POPDI-6), pelvic floor impact questionnaire-7(PFIQ-7), prolapse and Incontinence sexual function questionnaire short form(PISQ-12). Results The median follow-up time for patients in the study group is 13.13 months, with an objective cure rate of 96.47% and a reoperation rate of 1.18%. The perioperative complication rates are 6.45% for uterine resection and 4.35% for uterine preservation, while the mesh exposure rate is 1.61% for uterine resection. In comparison, the median follow-up time for patients in the control group is slightly longer at 13.76 months, with an objective cure rate of 92.5% and a reoperation rate of 2.5%. The perioperative complication rates are higher at 14.71% for uterine resection and as high as 33.33% for uterine preservation, while the mesh exposure rate is also elevated at 8.82% for uterine resection. Despite these differences, there was no significant disparity in objective cure rates or reoperation rates between the study group and the control group. Furthermore, it was observed that the study group experienced shorter operation times, less bleeding, faster postoperative recovery, shorter hospitalization periods, lower perioperative complications, and reduced mesh exposure rates?especially among patients with uterine preservation. Additionally, intra-group comparisons revealed significant improvements in all POP-Q indicators one year after surgery (P < 0.05), along with significantly lower scores on PFDI-20, UDI-6, CRADI-8, POPDI-6, PFIQ-7, and PISQ-12 scales compared to pre-surgery levels (P < 0.05). However, no significant inter-group differences were noted. Conclusions Tension-free laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh proves to be an effective surgical approach for treating anteriorand middle pelvic organ prolapse. It demonstrates few perioperative complications while significantly improving prolapse symptoms and enhancing patient qualityof life. It stands as a viable alternative to sacrocolpopexy, particularly beneficial for patients with a preserved uterus.
| 1 | 中华医学会妇产科学分会妇科盆地学组. 盆腔器官脱垂的中国诊治指南(2020年版)[J]. 中华妇科杂志, 2020,55(5):300-306. |
| 2 | BATALLER E, ROS C, ANGLèS S, et al. Anatomical outcomes 1 year after pelvic organ prolapse surgery in patients with and without a uterus at a high risk of recurrence: a randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy/cervicopexy and anterior vaginal mesh[J]. Int Urogynecol J, 2019,30(4):545-555. doi:10.1007/s00192-018-3702-7 |
| 3 | VEIT-RUBIN N, DUBUISSON J B, GAYET-AGERON A, et al. Patient satisfaction after laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh for pelvic organ prolapse: outcome report of a continuous series of 417 patients[J]. Int Urogynecol J, 2017,28(11):1685-1693. doi:10.1007/s00192-017-3327-2 |
| 4 | ARCIERI M, MORLACCO A, MONTEBELLI F, et al. Sacrocolpopexy after sub-total hysterectomy vs. sacral hysteropexy for advanced urogenital prolapse: A propensity-matched study[J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet,2023,163(3):847-853. doi:10.1002/ijgo.14959 |
| 5 | 李华梅,张兰玲,杨林青,等. 腹腔镜下Dubuisson术式治疗盆腔脏器脱垂临床分析[J]. 现代妇产科进展, 2021, 30(11):843-845,850. doi:10.13283/j.cnki.xdfckjz.2021.11.008 |
| 6 | D?LLENBACH P. Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension (LLS) for the Treatment of Apical Prolapse: A New Gold Standard?[J]. Front Surg, 2022, 9:898392. doi:10.3389/fsurg.2022.898392 |
| 7 | 孙秀丽. 盆底支持结构Ⅲ水平修复的重要性[J]. 中国妇产科临床杂志, 2019,20(2):97-98. |
| 8 | CHATZIIOANNIDOU K, VEIT-RUBIN N, D?LLENBACH P. Laparoscopic lateral suspension for anterior and apical prolapse: a prospective cohort with standardized technique[J]. Int Urogynecol J, 2022,33(2):319-325. doi:10.1007/s00192-021-04784-0 |
| 9 | DEFFIEUX X, PERROUIN-VERBE M A, CAMPAGNE-LOISEAU S, et al. Diagnosis and management of complications following pelvic organ prolapse surgery using a synthet ic mesh: French national guidelines for clinical practice[J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2024,294:170-179. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2024.01.015 |
| 10 | KAPANDJI M. Cure des prolapsus uro-génitaux par la colpo-isthmo-cystopexie par bandelette transversale et la Douglassorraphie ligamento-péritonéale étagée et croisée [Treatment of urogenital prolapse by colpo-isthmo-cystopexy with transverse strip and crossed, multiple layer, ligamento-peritoneal douglasorrhaphy][J]. Ann Chir, 1967,21(5):321-328. |
| 11 | DUBUISSON J, CHAPRON C. Laparoscopic Iliac Colpo-Uterine Suspension For the Treatment of Genital Prolapse Using Two Meshes: A New Operative Laparoscopic Approach[J]. Gynecol Surg, 1998,14(4): 153-159. doi:10.1089/gyn.1998.14.153 |
| 12 | DUBUISSON J, VEIT-RUBIN N, BOUQUET DE JOLINIèRE J, et al. Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension: Benefits of a Cross-shaped Mesh to Treat Difficult Vaginal Vault Prolapse[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2016,23(5):672. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2016.01.028 |
| 13 | MULAYIM B, SENDAG F. Modified Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension: The Mulayim Technique[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol,2019,26(3):407-408. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2018.07.014 |
| 14 | YASSA M, DOGAN O, TUG N. Regarding "Modified Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension: The Mulayim Technique"[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2019,26(3):571-572. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2018.09.788 |
| 15 | SCHUG-PASS C, TAMME C, TANNAPFEL A, et al. A lightweight polypropylene mesh (TiMesh) for laparoscopic intraperitoneal repair of abdominal wall hernias: comparison of biocompatibility with the DualMesh in an experimental study using the porcine model[J]. Surg Endosc, 2006,20(3):402-409. doi:10.1007/s00464-004-8277-3 |
| 16 | SAAD S, MURDOCH C, WORKMAN V, et al. In-vitro evaluation of macrophage response to polypropylene mesh before and after application of mechano-oxidative stress[J]. Eur Urol, 2023,83:S1190. doi:10.1016/s0302-2838(23)00882-5 |
| 17 | PROTSEPKO O, VOISARD P, KUHN C, et al. Induction of a different immune response in non-titanized compared to titanized polypropylene meshes[J]. Acta Biomater, 2023,169:363-371. doi:10.1016/j.actbio.2023.08.018 |
| 18 | FARR N T H, KLOSTERHALFEN B, NOé G K. Characterization in respect to degradation of titanium-coated polypropylene surgical mesh explanted from humans[J]. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater, 2023,111(5):1142-1152. doi:10.1002/jbm.b.35221 |
| 19 | ABDULAGATOV I M, RAGIMOV R M, KHAMIDOV М А, et al. ALD coated polypropylene hernia meshes for prevention of mesh-related post-surgery complications: an experimental study in animals[J]. Biomed Mater, 2021,17(1).doi: 10.1088/1748-605X/ac361e . |
| 20 | ISENLIK B S, AKSOY O, EROL O, et al. Comparison of laparoscopic lateral suspension and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with concurrent total laparoscopic hysterectomy for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: a randomized controlled clinical trial[J]. Int Urogynecol J, 2023,34(1):231-238. doi:10.1007/s00192-022-05267-6 |
| 21 | RUSSO E, GIANNINI A, GUEVARA M M, et al. Medium-term outcomes after robotic-assisted lateral suspension with mesh for advanced multi-compartmental prolapse[J]. Int Urogynecol J, 2020,31(8):1647-1653. doi:10.1007/s00192-019-04069-7 |
| 22 | CHATZIIOANNIDOU K, VEIT-RUBIN N, D?LLENBACH P. Laparoscopic lateral suspension for anterior and apical prolapse: a prospective cohort with standardized technique[J]. Int Urogynecol J, 2022,33(2):319-325. doi:10.1007/s00192-021-04784-0 |
| 23 | MEREU L, TATEO S, D'ALTERIO M N, et al. Laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh for apical and anterior pelvic organ prolapse: A prospective double center study[J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2020,244:16-20. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.10.026 |
| 24 | MALANOWSKA E, STARCZEWSKI A, BIELEWICZ W, et al. Assessment of Overactive Bladder after Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension for Pelvic Organ Prolapse[J]. Biomed Res Int, 2019,2019:9051963. doi:10.1155/2019/9051963 |
| 25 | 刘书杰,张海燕,刘印美,等. 腹腔镜改良Dubuisson术治疗盆腔器官脱垂的临床疗效分析[J]. 腹腔镜外科杂志, 2023,28(12):929-933. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |