SURGICAL APPROACHES TO FEMALE PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE: CLINICAL PRACTICE OF GYNECOLOGISTS IN THE REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN
Keywords:
gynecologists of the Republic, pelvic organ prolapse, analysis of surgical interventionsAbstract
Surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is considered a functional approach aimed at restoring pelvic anatomy and eliminating symptoms that significantly affect patients' quality of life. Over the past decades, prolapse surgery has undergone significant changes under the influence of advances in surgical techniques and changing clinical preferences. With the development of evidence-based medicine, many traditional approaches have been rethought, and modern research continues to confirm or challenge the effectiveness of various surgical strategies. Understanding the relative advantages and limitations of existing techniques is an important factor in clinical decision-making and optimizing treatment outcomes. This paper presents a retrospective analysis of prolapse surgery performed by gynecologists in regional departments of the Republic over a five-year period. The surgical methods used and their compliance with clinical recommendations were evaluated, and shortcomings in the application of modern approaches were identified, particularly in terms of uterine preservation and apical support. The data obtained provide an insight into current trends in PTO surgery and highlight the need for wider implementation of modern urogynecological practices in regional clinical institutions.
References
Ballard K, Ayenachew F, Wright J, Atnafu H. Prevalence of obstetric fistula and symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse in rural Ethiopia. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(7):1063–7.
Detollenaere RJ, den Boon J, Stekelenburg J, et al. Sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy with suspension of the uterosacral ligaments in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: multicentre randomised non-inferiority trial. BMJ. 2015;351:h3717. Published 2015 Jul 23. doi:10.1136/bmj.h3717.
Enklaar, Rosa A et al. “Manchester Procedure vs Sacrospinous Hysteropexy for Treatment of Uterine Descent: A Randomized Clinical Trial.” JAMA vol. 330,7 (2023): 626-635. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.13140
Maher C, Yeung E, Haya N, et al. Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023;7(7):CD012376. Published 2023 Jul 26. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD012376.pub2
Meriwether KV, Antosh DD, Olivera CK, et al. Uterine preservation vs hysterectomy in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis and clinical practice guidelines. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;219(2):129-146.e2. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2018.01.018
Menefee, Shawn A et al. “Apical Suspension Repair for Vaginal Vault Prolapse: A Randomized Clinical Trial.” JAMA surgery, e241206. 22 May. 2024, doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2024.1206
Robinson MO, Linder BJ. Evaluation and treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Minerva Med. 2023 Aug;114(4):516-528. doi: 10.23736/S0026-4806.22.08396-3. Epub 2023 Feb 14. PMID: 36786749.
Sadeh R, Schmidt M, Hod Y, Zilberlicht A, Feferkorn I, Haya N, Abramov Y. A comparative study of Colpocleisis vs. Vaginal Hysterectomy for the treat- ment of Advanced Pelvic Organ Prolapse. Isr Med Association Journal: IMAJ. 2022;25(12):842–6.
Tolstrup, Cæcilie Krogsgaard et al. “The Manchester procedure versus vaginal hysterectomy in the treatment of uterine prolapse: a review.” International urogynecology journal vol. 28,1 (2017): 33-40. doi:10.1007/s00192-016-3100-y
Wu J. M., Matthews C. A., Conover M. M. et al. Lifetime risk of stress urinar incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Obstet Gynecol 2024;123(6):1201–6