-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Laparoscopic synthetic mesh explantation after sacrohysteropexy
Z. Rusavy, Y. Abdelkhalek, B. Najib, B. Deval
Jazyk angličtina Země Anglie, Velká Británie
Typ dokumentu kazuistiky, časopisecké články, audiovizuální média
NLK
ProQuest Central
od 1997-01-01 do Před 1 rokem
Medline Complete (EBSCOhost)
od 2010-01-01 do Před 1 rokem
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
od 1997-01-01 do Před 1 rokem
- MeSH
- chirurgické síťky * škodlivé účinky MeSH
- laparoskopie * MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- močový měchýř zranění MeSH
- odstranění implantátu * MeSH
- prolaps pánevních orgánů * chirurgie MeSH
- recidiva MeSH
- rektum zranění MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- audiovizuální média MeSH
- časopisecké články MeSH
- kazuistiky MeSH
INTRODUCTION: In this video, we present a case of rectal and bladder injury, which occurred during laparoscopic mesh removal following sacrohysteropexy treated 6 months later with a laparoscopic pectopexy. METHODS: We present the case of a 66-year-old woman with a prolapse recurrence after sacrohysteropexy. During the laparoscopic explantation of the mesh, we detected a fixation of the mesh to the bladder and the rectum rather than a fixation to the vaginal walls. Consequently, bladder and rectal injuries occurred during the dissection and were diagnosed and repaired immediately. Due to bowel injury, the treatment of the prolapse was postponed. Six months later, a laparoscopic pectopexy was performed to avoid complications during the repeated dissection of the promontory. The postoperative recovery after the pectopexy was uncomplicated with no short-term prolapse recurrence or postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy appears to be an efficient approach to mesh explantation. Futhermore, laparoscopic pectopexy seems to be a good approach to secondary prolapse reconstruction after sacrohysteropexy mesh explantation avoiding complications during repeated dissection of the promontory.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc22025323
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20221031100133.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 221017s2022 enk f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1007/s00192-022-05141-5 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)35254472
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a enk
- 100 1_
- $a Rusavy, Zdenek $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic. rusavyz@fnplzen.cz $u Department of Functional Pelvic Surgery & Oncology, Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, Ramsay, Générale de Santé, Paris, France. rusavyz@fnplzen.cz $1 https://orcid.org/0000000171259819
- 245 10
- $a Laparoscopic synthetic mesh explantation after sacrohysteropexy / $c Z. Rusavy, Y. Abdelkhalek, B. Najib, B. Deval
- 520 9_
- $a INTRODUCTION: In this video, we present a case of rectal and bladder injury, which occurred during laparoscopic mesh removal following sacrohysteropexy treated 6 months later with a laparoscopic pectopexy. METHODS: We present the case of a 66-year-old woman with a prolapse recurrence after sacrohysteropexy. During the laparoscopic explantation of the mesh, we detected a fixation of the mesh to the bladder and the rectum rather than a fixation to the vaginal walls. Consequently, bladder and rectal injuries occurred during the dissection and were diagnosed and repaired immediately. Due to bowel injury, the treatment of the prolapse was postponed. Six months later, a laparoscopic pectopexy was performed to avoid complications during the repeated dissection of the promontory. The postoperative recovery after the pectopexy was uncomplicated with no short-term prolapse recurrence or postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy appears to be an efficient approach to mesh explantation. Futhermore, laparoscopic pectopexy seems to be a good approach to secondary prolapse reconstruction after sacrohysteropexy mesh explantation avoiding complications during repeated dissection of the promontory.
- 650 _2
- $a senioři $7 D000368
- 650 12
- $a odstranění implantátu $7 D020878
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 12
- $a laparoskopie $7 D010535
- 650 12
- $a prolaps pánevních orgánů $x chirurgie $7 D056887
- 650 _2
- $a rektum $x zranění $7 D012007
- 650 _2
- $a recidiva $7 D012008
- 650 12
- $a chirurgické síťky $x škodlivé účinky $7 D013526
- 650 _2
- $a močový měchýř $x zranění $7 D001743
- 655 _2
- $a kazuistiky $7 D002363
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a audiovizuální média $7 D059040
- 700 1_
- $a Abdelkhalek, Yara $u Department of Functional Pelvic Surgery & Oncology, Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, Ramsay, Générale de Santé, Paris, France
- 700 1_
- $a Najib, Bernard $u Department of Functional Pelvic Surgery & Oncology, Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, Ramsay, Générale de Santé, Paris, France
- 700 1_
- $a Deval, Bruno $u Department of Functional Pelvic Surgery & Oncology, Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, Ramsay, Générale de Santé, Paris, France
- 773 0_
- $w MED00002395 $t International urogynecology journal $x 1433-3023 $g Roč. 33, č. 7 (2022), s. 2049-2051
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35254472 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20221017 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20221031100131 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1854836 $s 1176613
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2022 $b 33 $c 7 $d 2049-2051 $e 20220307 $i 1433-3023 $m International urogynecology journal $n Int. urogynecol. j. (Print) $x MED00002395
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20221017