Obstetrics & Gynecology Track the topics, authors and articles important to you
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Obstetrics & Gynecology 2008;111:891-898
© 2008 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nguyen, J. N.
Right arrow Articles by Burchette, R. J.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nguyen, J. N.
Right arrow Articles by Burchette, R. J.
Related Collections
Right arrow Urogynecology

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Outcome After Anterior Vaginal Prolapse Repair

A Randomized Controlled Trial

John N. Nguyen, MD1 and Raoul J. Burchette, MA, MS2

From the 1Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Southern California Permanente Medical Group, Bellflower, California, and 2Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente, Pasadena, California.

OBJECTIVES: To report 1-year outcomes of a randomized controlled trial comparing polypropylene mesh–reinforced anterior vaginal prolapse repair with anterior colporrhaphy.

METHODS: Seventy-six patients with stage II or greater anterior vaginal prolapse were randomly assigned to either colporrhaphy or polypropylene mesh repair. The primary outcome was recurrent stage II anterior vaginal prolapse, and secondary outcomes were effects on quality of life and sexual symptom scores, operative time, blood loss, length of hospitalization, and adverse events.

RESULTS: Thirty-eight women had anterior colporrhaphy, and 37 had polypropylene mesh repair. One patient allocated to mesh repair withdrew from the study before surgery. Clinical and demographic data did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups. One year after surgery, optimal and satisfactory anterior vaginal support were obtained in 21 of 38 (55%) of the colporrhaphy group and 33 of 38 (87%) of the mesh group (P=.005). Patients in both groups reported less bother after surgery in both prolapse and urinary symptoms. The rates of de novo dyspareunia were 4 of 26 (16%) and 2 of 23 (9%) in the colporrhaphy and mesh groups, respectively. Two of 37 (5%) patients had vaginal mesh extrusion. Nine anterior colporrhaphy patients would have to have recurrent anterior vaginal prolapse to prevent one vaginal mesh extrusion. Neither serious adverse events nor deaths occurred in either group.

CONCLUSION: Anterior vaginal prolapse repair with polypropylene mesh reinforcement offers lower anatomic recurrence than anterior colporrhaphy at one year. However, quality of life and sexual symptoms scores improved in both groups.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00535301

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.