Anzeige
Erschienen in:
01.04.2010 | Original Article
Primary versus recurrent prolapse surgery: differences in outcomes
Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal | Ausgabe 4/2010
Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhaltenAbstract
Introduction and hypothesis
We set out to evaluate anatomical outcomes of recurrent vs. primary prolapse surgery, focusing on anterior colporrhaphy (AC).
Methods
A retrospective study was performed comparing patients who underwent AC for recurrent cystocele (group I) and a matched control group who underwent primary AC (group II).
Results
Thirty-one patients were included in each group. Median follow-up was 22 (5–55) months. Successful anterior vaginal support was obtained in 18/23 (78.2%) patients in group I and 17/21 (81%) patients in group II at 1 year (p = 1.000) and in 9/21 (42.8%) patients in group I and in 15/21 (71.4%) patients in group II at 2-year follow-up (p = 0.031).
Conclusions
Recurrent cystocele repair has a higher anatomic failure rate than primary repair at 2-year follow-up. Alternative surgical techniques that provide better long-term durability may be beneficial in repair of recurrent anterior wall prolapse.