• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Pelvic organ prolapse and uterine preservation: a survey of female gynecologists (POP-UP survey)

P. Urdzík, V. Kalis, M. Blaganje, Z. Rusavy, M. Smazinka, M. Havir, R. Dudič, KM. Ismail

. 2020 ; 20 (1) : 241. [pub] 20201027

Jazyk angličtina Země Velká Británie

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc21011981

Grantová podpora
1/0873/18 Vedecká Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR a SAV
Nr. LO1503 Grantová Agentura, Univerzita Karlova
CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_019/0000787 Ministerstvo Školství, Mládeže a Tělovýchovy

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to explore the personal views of female gynecologists regarding the management of POP with a particular focus on the issue of uterine sparing surgery. METHODS: A questionnaire based survey of practicing female gynecologists in the Czech Republic, Slovenia and Slovakia. RESULTS: A total of 140 female gynecologists from 81 units responded to our questionnaire. The majority of respondents stated they would rely on a urogynecologist to aid them with their choice of POP management options. The most preferred options for POP management were sacrocolpopexy and physiotherapy. Almost 2/3 of respondents opted for a hysterectomy together with POP surgery, if they were menopausal, even if the anatomical outcome was similar to uterine sparing POP surgery. Moreover, 81.4% of respondents, who initially opted for a uterine sparing procedure, changed their mind if the anatomical success of POP surgery with concomitant hysterectomy was superior. Discussing uterine cancer risk in relation to other organs had a less significant impact on their choices. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of female gynecologists in our study opted for hysterectomy if they were postmenopausal at the time of POP surgery. However, variation in information provision had an impact on their choice.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc21011981
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20210714131252.0
007      
ta
008      
210420s2020 xxk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1186/s12905-020-01105-3 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)33109157
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxk
100    1_
$a Urdzík, Peter $u Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Faculty of Medicine, Safarik's University and L. Pasteur Teaching Hospital in Kosice, SNP Street No. 1, 04001, Košice, Slovak Republic. peter.urdzik@upjs.sk
245    10
$a Pelvic organ prolapse and uterine preservation: a survey of female gynecologists (POP-UP survey) / $c P. Urdzík, V. Kalis, M. Blaganje, Z. Rusavy, M. Smazinka, M. Havir, R. Dudič, KM. Ismail
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to explore the personal views of female gynecologists regarding the management of POP with a particular focus on the issue of uterine sparing surgery. METHODS: A questionnaire based survey of practicing female gynecologists in the Czech Republic, Slovenia and Slovakia. RESULTS: A total of 140 female gynecologists from 81 units responded to our questionnaire. The majority of respondents stated they would rely on a urogynecologist to aid them with their choice of POP management options. The most preferred options for POP management were sacrocolpopexy and physiotherapy. Almost 2/3 of respondents opted for a hysterectomy together with POP surgery, if they were menopausal, even if the anatomical outcome was similar to uterine sparing POP surgery. Moreover, 81.4% of respondents, who initially opted for a uterine sparing procedure, changed their mind if the anatomical success of POP surgery with concomitant hysterectomy was superior. Discussing uterine cancer risk in relation to other organs had a less significant impact on their choices. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of female gynecologists in our study opted for hysterectomy if they were postmenopausal at the time of POP surgery. However, variation in information provision had an impact on their choice.
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a hysterektomie $x metody $x statistika a číselné údaje $7 D007044
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a porodnické chirurgické výkony $x škodlivé účinky $x metody $7 D013513
650    _2
$a léčba šetřící orgány $x metody $x statistika a číselné údaje $7 D059351
650    _2
$a prolaps pánevních orgánů $x chirurgie $7 D056887
650    _2
$a chirurgické síťky $7 D013526
650    _2
$a průzkumy a dotazníky $7 D011795
650    _2
$a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
651    _2
$a Slovinsko $7 D017524
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Kalis, Vladimir $u Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, alej Svobody 80, 304 60, Plzeň, Czech Republic ; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, Charles University, alej Svobody 80, 304 60, Plzeň, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Blaganje, Mija $u Division of Gynecology, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Šlajmerjeva 3, 1525, Ljubljana, Slovenia
700    1_
$a Rusavy, Zdenek $u Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, alej Svobody 80, 304 60, Plzeň, Czech Republic ; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, Charles University, alej Svobody 80, 304 60, Plzeň, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Smazinka, Martin $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, Charles University, alej Svobody 80, 304 60, Plzeň, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Havir, Martin $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, Charles University, alej Svobody 80, 304 60, Plzeň, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Dudič, Rastislav $u Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Faculty of Medicine, Safarik's University and L. Pasteur Teaching Hospital in Kosice, SNP Street No. 1, 04001, Košice, Slovak Republic
700    1_
$a Ismail, Khaled M $u Biomedical Center, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, alej Svobody 80, 304 60, Plzeň, Czech Republic ; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, alej Svobody 80, 304 60, Plzeň, Czech Republic
773    0_
$w MED00008209 $t BMC women's health $x 1472-6874 $g Roč. 20, č. 1 (2020), s. 241
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33109157 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20210420 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20210714131250 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1650373 $s 1132360
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2020 $b 20 $c 1 $d 241 $e 20201027 $i 1472-6874 $m BMC women's health $n BMC Womens Health $x MED00008209
GRA    __
$a 1/0873/18 $p Vedecká Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR a SAV
GRA    __
$a Nr. LO1503 $p Grantová Agentura, Univerzita Karlova
GRA    __
$a CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_019/0000787 $p Ministerstvo Školství, Mládeže a Tělovýchovy
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20210420

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

    Možnosti archivace