Outcomes study: A comparison of cure rates in 695 patients undergoing sacrospinous ligament fixation alone and with other site-specific procedures--a 16-year study.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 12824986.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
The study was undertaken to compare the results of vaginal fixation from a time when sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) was performed solely or with minimal repair of other defects with the results of SSLF when site-specific defect approaches were performed. Six hundred ninety-five patients underwent an SSLF over a 16-year period. From 1985 through 1990, minimal attention was paid to other sites because the SSLF appeared to correct all vaginal tract defects (group A = 173). From 1991 through 1994, we realized that our attempts were failing. An anterior and posterior colporrhaphy, and a high ligation of any cul-de-sac were performed when appropriate (group B = 221). From 1995 through 2000, site-specific repairs of all defects were used to care for these patients with prolapse (group C = 301). The anatomic cure rates for the SSLF (when evaluating only the vaginal apex) were calculated for vault fixation. When site-specific repairs were used and all sites repaired anatomically (group C), cure predominated. The chi(2) calculations for group A compared with group B and group B compared with group C were performed. The SSLF technique is still a good option for apical prolapse, does not have to distort the vaginal axis, and is to be used in conjunction with other site-specific repairs.
Medical subject headings
- Ligaments
- Treatment Outcome
- Uterine Prolapse