AB062. The comparative study on the efficacy and prognosis of the treatment of pelvic floor repair by transvaginal and laparoscopic approaches

Objective: For the patients with pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD) associated with stress urinary incontinence (SUI), we used the polypropylene mesh for pelvic floor repair via transvaginal and the laparoscopic routes respectively. This prospective study compared the differences of the prognosis and the short-long term efficacy between the two surgical procedures.

Methods: Thirty cases with proven SUI or accompanied anterior pelvic organs (bladder, urethra) prolapse were divided into control group randomly, 15 patients were treated with the polypropylene mesh for pelvic floor repair via transvaginal, the other 15 patients were treated using pelvic floor repair via laparoscopic. The complications of pre-operation and post-operation and the efficacy were evaluated.

Results: There were no significant differences in the total operation time, bleeding, the post-operation Clavein classification of surgical complications, hospitalization time, the improvement rate of postoperative symptom and the long term recurrence rate between the two groups. The method of laparoscopy had lower incidence of sexual dysfunction than the transvaginal route.

Conclusions: Both of the transvaginal and the laparoscopy pelvic floor repair methods are safe and effective for PFD and SUI. As the laparoscopy procedure has lower incidence of sexual dysfunction, it is more suitable for the female patients less than 60 years old who have certain requirement to sex life.

Keywords: Pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD); stress urinary incontinence (SUI); pelvic floor repair