"协和"全盆底重建术治疗重度盆腔器官脱垂的多中心前瞻性研究

目的 探讨"协和"全盆底重建术治疗重度盆腔器官脱垂(POP)的疗效及对患者生命质量和性生活质量的影响.方法 自2006年6月至2008年12月,在全国8家医疗单位开展多中心前瞻性研究,包括北京协和医院、复旦大学附属妇产科医院、北京大学第一医院、北京大学第三医院、第三军医大学西南医院、四川大学华西第二医院、北京大学人民医院、北京妇产医院,共277例POP患者参加本研究,所有患者术前均为Ⅲ度或Ⅳ度.总结研究的中期结果,通过术后随访患者的POP分度情况了解POP的解剖学改善情况.通过比较患者术前、术后盆底功能影响问卷简表(PFIQ-7)和盆底不适调查表简表(PFDI-20)评分,评估手术对患者生命质量的影响;通过比较术前、术后POP-尿失禁性生活问卷(PISQ)评分,评价手术对患者性生活质量的影响.结果 中位随访时间14个月(6～28个月),23例患者术后复发,复发率为8.3%(23/277).19例(6.9%,19/277)患者在随访中发现网片暴露或侵蚀.术后新发的尿失禁为18例(6.5%,18/277).277例患者术前、术后6个月、术后1年的PFIQ-7评分分别为(66.9±65.1)、(7.2±26.7)、(7.6±31.6)分,PFDI-20评分分别为(75.8±49.0)、(17.4±25.2)、(15.0±22.6)分,术后较术前生命质量评分显著降低,差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.01).术前、术后6个月、术后1年的PSIQ评分分别为(76.6±15.4)、(75.5±14.5)、(73.6±12.6)分,术前与术后比较,差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05),手术对性生活质量无明显影响;但术后9例(11%,9/80)患者新发性交痛.结论 "协和"全盆底重建术是治疗重度POP一种有效、安全的手术,可以明显改善患者的生命质量,与传统的全盆底重建术疗效相当.

Abstract：

Objective To evaluate clinical efficiency and quality-of-life outcomes in treatment of severe pelvic organ prolapse by the "Xiehe" pelvic floor reconstruction surgery. Methods From Jun. 2006 to Dec. 2008, 277 severe pelvic organ prolapse patients with stage Ⅲ to Ⅳ from 8 hospitals in China were enrolled in this prospective study. Pelvic organ prolapse quantitative examination (POP-Q) and anatomic improvement in these patients after surgery were analyzed in this interim study. Comparisons of pelvic floor impact questionnaire-short form 7 (PFIQ-7) and pelvic floor distress inventory-short form 20 (PFDI-20) in these patients before and after surgery was used to evaluate quality of life. Comparison of pelvic organ prolapse-urinary incontinence sexual questionnaire (PISQ) in these patients before and after surgery was used to evaluate quality of sexual life. Results With a median follow-up of 14. 0 months (6 -28 months),twenty-three patients showed recurrent prolapse (8. 3%, 23/277), and anatomical success ( ＜ stage 2 in the treated compartment) was 91.7% (254/277). In this series, mesh exposure or erosion rate was 6. 9% (19/277). The postoperative de novo stress incontinence rate was 6. 5% (18/277). The scores for PFIQ-7 and PFDI-20, and its subscales were significantly improved, the scores of before treatment were lower than those after treatment (P ＜0. 01 ). And there was no significant difference in the average score of PISQ before and after the surgery (76. 6 ± 15.4 versus 75.5 ± 14. 5 versus 73.6 ± 12. 6, P ＞0. 05 ), but the rate of de novo dyspareunia was 11% (9/80). Conclusions "Xiehe" pelvic floor reconstruction surgery was safe and efficacy in treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. It could improve quality of life remarkably with less cost when compared with the traditional total pelvic floor reconstruction surgery.

Prospective multi-center study in "Xiehe" pelvic floor reconstruction surgery for severe pelvic organ prolapse

Objective To evaluate clinical efficiency and quality-of-life outcomes in treatment of severe pelvic organ prolapse by the "Xiehe" pelvic floor reconstruction surgery. Methods From Jun. 2006 to Dec. 2008, 277 severe pelvic organ prolapse patients with stage Ⅲ to Ⅳ from 8 hospitals in China were enrolled in this prospective study. Pelvic organ prolapse quantitative examination (POP-Q) and anatomic improvement in these patients after surgery were analyzed in this interim study. Comparisons of pelvic floor impact questionnaire-short form 7 (PFIQ-7) and pelvic floor distress inventory-short form 20 (PFDI-20) in these patients before and after surgery was used to evaluate quality of life. Comparison of pelvic organ prolapse-urinary incontinence sexual questionnaire (PISQ) in these patients before and after surgery was used to evaluate quality of sexual life. Results With a median follow-up of 14. 0 months (6 -28 months),twenty-three patients showed recurrent prolapse (8. 3%, 23/277), and anatomical success ( ＜ stage 2 in the treated compartment) was 91.7% (254/277). In this series, mesh exposure or erosion rate was 6. 9% (19/277). The postoperative de novo stress incontinence rate was 6. 5% (18/277). The scores for PFIQ-7 and PFDI-20, and its subscales were significantly improved, the scores of before treatment were lower than those after treatment (P ＜0. 01 ). And there was no significant difference in the average score of PISQ before and after the surgery (76. 6 ± 15.4 versus 75.5 ± 14. 5 versus 73.6 ± 12. 6, P ＞0. 05 ), but the rate of de novo dyspareunia was 11% (9/80). Conclusions "Xiehe" pelvic floor reconstruction surgery was safe and efficacy in treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. It could improve quality of life remarkably with less cost when compared with the traditional total pelvic floor reconstruction surgery.