Preview

Астраханский медицинский журнал

Расширенный поиск

Современные методы хирургического лечения пролапса тазовых органов

https://doi.org/10.17021/1992-6499-2023-3-8-21

Аннотация

   Пролапс гениталий является актуальной проблемой здравоохранения в связи с увеличением средней продолжительности жизни, а также необходимостью улучшения качества жизни пациентов. В статье представлен обзор литературных данных, посвященных хирургическому лечению пролапса гениталий. Освещена история эволюции методов хирургической коррекции пролапса. Отдельно описаны вопросы коррекции пролапса гениталий с применением сетчатых имплантов, а также осложнения этих операций.

Об авторах

Ю. А. Болдырева
Красноярский государственный медицинский университет имени профессора В.Ф. Войно-Ясенецкого; Федеральный Сибирский научно-клинический центр ФМБА России
Россия

Юлия Александровна Болдырева, аспирант, врач акушер-гинеколог

кафедра перинатологии, акушерства и гинекологии

Красноярск



В. Б. Цхай
Красноярский государственный медицинский университет имени профессора В.Ф. Войно-Ясенецкого; Федеральный Сибирский научно-клинический центр ФМБА России
Россия

Виталий Борисович Цхай, доктор медицинских наук, профессор, заведующий кафедрой, научный руководитель

кафедра перинатологии, акушерства и гинекологии

гинекологическое отделение

Красноярск



А. М. Полстяной
Федеральный Сибирский научно-клинический центр ФМБА России
Россия

Алексей Михайлович Полстяной, кандидат медицинских наук, заведующий отделением

гинекологическое отделение

Красноярск



О. Ю. Полстяная
Красноярский государственный медицинский университет имени профессора В.Ф. Войно-Ясенецкого; Федеральный Сибирский научно-клинический центр ФМБА России
Россия

Оксана Юрьевна Полстяная, ассистент, заместитель главного врача

кафедра перинатологии, акушерства и гинекологии

Красноярск



М. С. Табакаева
Красноярский государственный медицинский университет имени профессора В.Ф. Войно-Ясенецкого
Россия

Мария Сергеевна Табакаева, аспирант

ИПО

кафедра акушерства и гинекологии

Красноярск



Список литературы

1. Raju R., Linder B. J. Evaluation and Management of Pelvic Organ Prolapse // Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 2021. Vol. 96, no. 12. P. 3122–3129. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2021.09.005.

2. Ланина В. А., Кузьменко А. В., Винник Ю. Ю., Гяургиев Т. А. Хронобиологические особенности женщин с симптомами нижних мочевых путей // Сибирское медицинское обозрение. 2020. № 4. С. 71–76. doi: 10.20333/2500136-2020-4-71-76.

3. Amid P. K., Shulman A. G., Lichtenstein I. L., Hakakha M. Biomaterials for abdominal wall hernia surgery and principles of their applications // Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery. 1994. Vol. 379, no. 3. P. 168–171. doi: 10.1007/BF00680113

4. Guler Z., Roovers J. P. Role of Fibroblasts and Myofibroblasts on the Pathogenesis and Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse // Biomolecules. 2022. Vol. 12, no. 1. P. 94. doi: 10.3390/biom12010094.

5. Paul K., Darzi S., Werkmeister J. A., Gargett C.E., Mukherjee S. Emerging Nano/Micro-Structured Degradable Polymeric Meshes for Pelvic Floor Reconstruction // Nanomaterials. 2020. Vol. 10, no. 6. P. 1120. doi: 10.3390/nano10061120.

6. Huguier J., Scali P. Posterior suspension of the genital axis on the lumbosacral disk in the treatment of uterine prolapsed // La presse Medicale. 1958. Vol. 66, no. 35. P. 781–784.

7. Gluck O., Rusavy Z., Grinstein E., Abdelkhalek Y., Deval B. Effect of Age on Complications Rate and Surgical Outcomes in Women Undergoing Laparoscopic Sacrohysteropexy and Sacrocolpopexy // Journal of minimally invasive gynecology. 2022. Vol. 29, no. 6. P. 753–758. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2022.01.017.

8. Gagyor D., Kalis V., Smazinka M., Rusavy Z., Pilka R., Ismail K. M. Pelvic organ prolapse and uterine preservation: a cohort study (POP-UP study) // BMC Womens Health. 2021. Vol. 21, no. 1. P. 72. doi: 10.1186/s12905-021-01208-5.

9. Illiano E., Natale F., Giannantoni A., Gubbiotti M., Balzarro M., Costantini E. Urodynamic findings and functional outcomes after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse // International Urogynecology Journal. 2019. Vol. 30, no. 4. P. 589–594. doi: 10.1007/s00192-019-03874-4.

10. Kale A., Biler A., Terzi H., Usta T., Kale E. Laparoscopic pectopexy: initial experience of single center with a new technique for apical prolapse surgery // International Brazilian Journal of Urology. 2017. Vol. 43, no. 5. P. 903–909. doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2017.0070.

11. van Oudheusden A. M. J., Eissing J., Terink I. M., Vink M. D. H., van Kuijk S. M. J., Bongers M. Y., Coolen A. W. M. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse : long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial // International Urogynecology Journal. 2023. Vol. 34, no. 1. P. 93–104. doi: 10.1007/s00192-022-05350-y.

12. Padoa A., Shiber Y., Fligelman T., Tomashev R., Tsviban A., Smorgick N. Advanced Cystocele is a Risk Factor for Surgical Failure after Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy // Journal of minimally invasive gynecology. 2022. Vol. 29, no. 3. P. 409–415. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2021.11.002.

13. Yadav M., Hayashi T., Krisna R., Nutthachote P., Sawada Y., Tokiwa S., Cortes A. R., Nomura M. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in a patient with vault prolapse of the sigmoid stump after vaginoplasty in Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome: A case report // Case Reports in Women's Health. 2021. Vol. 30 e00313. doi: 10.1016/j.crwh.2021.e00313.

14. Illiano E., Giannitsas K., Costantini E. Comparison between laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with hysterectomy and hysteropexy in advanced urogenital prolapse // International Urogynecology Journal. 2020. Vol. 31, no. 10. P. 2069–2074. doi: 10.1007/s00192-020-04260-1.

15. Ichikawa M., Kaseki H., Akira S. Laparoscopic versus abdominal sacrocolpopexy for treatment of multi-compartmental pelvic organ prolapse : A systematic review // Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery. 2018. Vol. 11, no. 1. P. 15–22. doi: 10.1111/ases.12478.

16. García-Segui A., Lorenzo Soriano L., Costa-Martínez M. A., Amorós Torres A., Gilabert A., Oltra M F. The use of one-piece U-shaped mesh and barbed sutures in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy // Actas Urológicas Españolas (English Edition). 2020. Vol. 44, no. 1. P. 49–55. doi: 10.1016/j.acuro.2019.09.002.

17. Baines G., Price N., Jefferis H., Cartwright R., Jackson S. R. Mesh-related complications of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy // International Urogynecology Journal. 2019. Vol. 30, no. 9. P. 1475–1481. doi: 10.1007/s00192-019-03952-7.

18. Sarasa Castelló N., Toth A., Canis M., Botchorishvilli R. Safety of Synthetic Glue Used for Laparoscopic Prolapse Treatment // Journal of minimally invasive gynecology. 2018. Vol. 25, no. 6. P. 957–958. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.12.022.

19. Ящук А. Г., Мусин И. И., Нафтулович Р. А., Попова Е. М., Фаткуллина И. Б., Абсалямова Д. Ф., Камалова К. А., Молоканова А. Р., Ящук К. Н. Оценка имплант-ассоциированных осложнений при установке сетчатых протезов в реконструкции тазового дна // Гинекология. 2019. Т. 21, № 5. С. 69–73. doi: 10.26442/20795696.2019.5.190669.

20. van Zanten F., van Iersel J. J., Paulides T. J. C., Verheijen P. M., Broeders I. A. M. J., Consten E. C. J., Lenters E., Schraffordt Koops S. E. Long-term mesh erosion rate following abdominal robotic reconstructive pelvic floor surgery: a prospective study and overview of the literature // International Urogynecology Journal. 2020. Vol. 31, no. 7. P. 1423–1433. doi: 10.1007/s00192-019-03990-1.

21. Aleksandrov A., Smith A. V., Rabischong B., Botchorishvili R. Mesh-less laparoscopic treatment of apical prolapse // Facts, Views & Vision. 2021. Vol. 13, no. 2. P. 179–181. doi: 10.52054/FVVO.13.2.013.

22. Kwon S. Y., Brown S., Hibbeln J., Freed J. S. Conservative management of pelvic abscess following sacrocolpopexy : a report of three cases and review of the literature // International Urogynecology Journal. 2017. Vol. 28, no. 6. P. 875–879. doi: 10.1007/s00192-016-3189-z.

23. Gungor Ugurlucan F., Yasa C., Demir O., Basaran S., Bakir B., Yalcin O. Long-Term Follow-Up of a Patient with Spondylodiscitis after Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy : An Unusual Complication with a Review of the Literature // Urologia Internationalis. 2019. Vol. 103, no. 3. P. 364–368. doi: 10.1159/000494370.

24. Stabile G., Romano F., Topouzova G. A., Mangino F. P., Di Lorenzo G., Laganà A. S., De Manzini N., Ricci G. Spondylodiscitis After Surgery for Pelvic Organ Prolapse : Description of a Rare Complication and Systematic Review of the Literature // Frontiers in Surgery. 2021. Vol. 8. P. 741311. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.741311.

25. Doğan Durdağ G., Alemdaroğlu S., Durdağ E., Yüksel Şimşek S., Turunç T., Yetkinel S., Yılmaz Baran Ş., Çelik H. Lumbosacral discitis as a rare complication of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy // International Urogynecology Journal. 2020. Vol. 31, no. 11. P 2431–2433. doi: 10.1007/s00192-020-04331-3.

26. García E. G., de Miguel Manso S., Tejedor J. G., de Andrés Asenjo B., Escudero V. P., Martín J. I. G. Transcervical drainage of abdominal-pelvic abscess after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy // International Urogynecology Journal. 2021. Vol. 32, no. 3. P. 581–585. doi: 10.1007/s00192-020-04366-6.

27. Sato H., Teramoto S., Sato K., Abe H. Surgical management of mesh infection following laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and tension-free vaginal mesh surgery : a report of two cases with a literature review // IJU Case Reports. 2018. Vol. 2, no. 1. P. 54–56. doi: 10.1002/iju5.12039.

28. Obut M., Oğlak S. C., Akgöl S. Comparison of the Quality of Life and Female Sexual Function Following Laparoscopic Pectopexy and Laparoscopic Sacrohysteropexy in Apical Prolapse Patients // Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy. 2021. Vol. 10, no. 2. P. 96–103. doi: 10.4103/GMIT.GMIT_67_20.

29. Kapandji M. Treatment of urogenital prolapse by colpoisthmo-cystopexy with transverse strip and crossed, multiple layer, ligamento-peritoneal douglasorrhaphy // Annales de Chirurgie. 1967. Vol. 21, no. 5. P. 321–328.

30. Cornier E, Madelenat P. The M. Kapandji hysteropexy : a laparoscopic technic and preliminary results // Journal de gynecologie, obstetrique et biologie de la reproduction (Paris). 1994. Vol. 23, no. 4. P. 378–385.

31. Dällenbach P. Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension (LLS) for the Treatment of Apical Prolapse : A New Gold Standard? // Frontiers in Surgery. 2022. Vol. 9. P. 898392. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.898392.

32. Dällenbach P., Alec M., Boulvain M., Shabanov S. Outcomes of robotically assisted laparoscopic lateral suspension (RALLS) with mesh for anterior and apical prolapse // Journal of Robotic Surgery. 2022. Vol. 16, no. 2. P. 287–294. doi: 10.1007/s11701-021-01234-3.

33. Chatziioannidou K., Veit-Rubin N., Dällenbach P. Laparoscopic lateral suspension for anterior and apical prolapse: a prospective cohort with standardized technique // International Urogynecology Journal. 2022. Vol. 33, no. 2. P. 319–325. doi: 10.1007/s00192-021-04784-0.

34. Richter K. The surgical treatment of the prolapsed vaginal fundus after uterine extirpation. A contribution on Amreich’s the sacrotuberal vaginal fixation // Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 1967. Vol. 27, no. 10. P. 941–954.

35. Szymczak P., Grzybowska M. E., Sawicki S., Futyma K., Wydra D. G. Perioperative and Long-Term Anatomical and Subjective Outcomes of Laparoscopic Pectopexy and Sacrospinous Ligament Suspension for POP-Q Stages II-IV Apical Prolapse // Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2022. Vol. 11, no. 8. P. 2215. doi: 10.3390/jcm11082215.

36. Campagna G., Panico G., Lombisani A., Vacca L., Caramazza D., Scambia G., Ercoli A. Laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension : a comprehensive, systematic literature review // European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2022. Vol. 277. P. 57–70. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.08.006.

37. OuYang Y., Xu W., Li F., Wang R., Zhao X. Anatomic identification of laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension : A step-by-step procedure // International Urogynecology Journal. 2022. Vol. 33, no. 12. P. 3587–3590. doi: 10.1007/s00192-022-05257-8.

38. Chill H. H., Gutman-Ido E., Navon I., Reuveni-Salzman A., Haj-Yahya R., Shveiky D. Laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension versus vaginal colposuspension using the Uphold Lite™ mesh system : clinical outcome and patient satisfaction // International Urogynecology Journal. 2021. Vol. 32, no. 6. P. 1513–1518. doi: 10.1007/s00192-020-04563-3.

39. Chill H. H., Navon I., Reuveni-Salzman A., Cohen A., Dick A., Shveiky D. Vaginal Colposuspension Using the Uphold Lite Mesh System versus Transvaginal Hysterectomy with Uterosacral Ligament Suspension for Treatment of Apical Prolapse : A Comparative Study // Journal of minimally invasive gynecology. 2021. Vol. 28, no. 10. P. 1759–1764. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2021.03.002.

40. Lozo S., Chill H. H., Botros C., Goldberg R. P., Gafni-Kane A. Long term surgical outcomes of vaginal colposuspension using the Uphold Lite™ mesh system vs. vaginal vault uterosacral ligament suspension for treatment of apical prolapse // European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2023. Vol. 280. P. 150–153. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.11.025.

41. Haj Yahya R., Chill H. H., Herzberg S., Asfour A., Lesser S., Shveiky D. Anatomical Outcome and Patient Satisfaction After Laparoscopic Uterosacral Ligament Hysteropexy for Anterior and Apical Prolapse // Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery. 2018. Vol. 24, no. 5. P. 352–355. doi: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000446.

42. Alfahmy A., Mahran A., Conroy B., Brewka R. R., Ibrahim M., Sheyn D., El-Nashar S. A., Hijaz A. Abdominal and vaginal pelvic support with concomitant hysterectomy for uterovaginal pelvic prolapse : a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis // International Urogynecology Journal. 2021. Vol. 32, no. 8. P. 2021–2031. doi: 10.1007/s00192-021-04861-4.

43. Joshi V. M. A new technique of uterine suspension to pectineal ligaments in the management of uterovaginal prolapsed // Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1993. Vol. 81, no. 5. P. 790–793.

44. Banerjee C., Noé K. G. Laparoscopic pectopexy : a new technique of prolapse surgery for obese patients // Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 2011. Vol. 284, no. 3. P. 631–635. doi: 10.1007/s00404-010-1687-7.

45. Tahaoglu A. E., Bakir M. S., Peker N., Bagli İ., Tayyar A. T. Modified laparoscopic pectopexy: short-term follow-up and its effects on sexual function and quality of life // International Urogynecology Journal. 2018. Vol. 29, no. 8. P. 1155–1160. doi: 10.1007/s00192-018-3565-y.

46. Karslı A., Karslı O., Kale A. Laparoscopic Pectopexy : An Effective Procedure for Pelvic Organ Prolapse with an Evident Improvement on Quality of Life // Prague Medical Report. 2021. Vol. 122, no. 1. P. 25–33. doi: 10.14712/23362936.2021.3.

47. Astepe B. S., Karsli A., Köleli I., Aksakal O. S., Terzi H., Kale A. Intermediate-term outcomes of laparoscopic pectopexy and vaginal sacrospino us fixation : a comparative study // International Brazilian Journal of Urology. 2019. Vol. 45, no. 5. P. 999–1007. doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2019.0103.

48. Bakir M. S., Bagli I., Cavus Y., Tahaoglu A. E. Laparoscopic Pectopexy and Paravaginal Repair after Failed Recurrent Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery // Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy. 2020. Vol. 9, no. 1. P. 42–44. doi: 10.4103/GMIT.GMIT_101_18.

49. Szymczak P., Grzybowska M. E., Sawicki S., Wydra D. G. Laparoscopic Pectopexy-CUSUM Learning Curve and Perioperative Complications Analysis // Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2021. Vol. 10, no. 5. P. 1052. doi: 10.3390/jcm10051052.

50. Chuang F. C., Chou Y. M., Wu L. Y., Yang T. H., Chen W. H., Huang K. H. Laparoscopic pectopexy: the learning curve and comparison with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy // International Urogynecology Journal. 2022. Vol. 33, no. 7. P. 1949–1956. doi: 10.1007/s00192-021-04934-4.

51. Biler A., Ertas I. E., Tosun G., Hortu I., Turkay U., Gultekin O. E., Igci G. Perioperative complications and short-term outcomes of abdominal sacrocolpopexy, laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy, and laparoscopic pectopexy for apical prolapse // International Brazilian Journal of Urology. 2018. Vol. 44, no. 5. P. 996–1004. doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2017.0692. PMID: 30044591; PMCID: PMC6237543.

52. Yu P., Liu C. Laparoscopic pectopexy with native tissue repair for pelvic organ prolapse // Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 2023. Vol. 307, no. 6. P. 1867–1872. doi: 10.1007/s00404-023-06980-3.

53. Dai Z., Li C., Wang X., Shu H., Zhang K., Dai C. A new laparoscopic technique of inguinal ligament suspension for vaginal vault prolapsed // International Journal of Surgery. 2017. Vol. 43. P. 131–136. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.05.071.

54. Pirtea L., Balint O., Secoșan C., Grigoraș D., Ilina R. Laparoscopic Pectopexy with Burch Colposuspension for Pelvic Prolapse Associated with Stress Urinary Incontinence // Journal of minimally invasive gynecology. 2020. Vol. 27, no. 5. P. 1023–1024. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2019.10.022.

55. Li C., Dai Z., Shu H. Laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse : study protocol for a randomized controlled trial // Trials. 2018. Vol. 19, no. 1. P. 160. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-2494-x.


Рецензия

Для цитирования:


Болдырева Ю.А., Цхай В.Б., Полстяной А.М., Полстяная О.Ю., Табакаева М.С. Современные методы хирургического лечения пролапса тазовых органов. Астраханский медицинский журнал. 2023;18(3):8-21. https://doi.org/10.17021/1992-6499-2023-3-8-21

For citation:


Boldyreva Yu.A., Tskhay V.B., Polstyanoy A.M., Polstyanaya O.Yu., Tabakaeva M.S. Modern methods of surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Astrakhan medical journal. 2023;18(3):8-21. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17021/1992-6499-2023-3-8-21

Просмотров: 191


Creative Commons License
Контент доступен под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1992-6499 (Print)