Geeta Vandana Reddi1, Venkata Ramana T2, Neelima3
BACKGROUND
Pelvic organ prolapse is a common complaint in gynaecological practice. Nulliparous prolapse is seen in 2% of female population and vault prolapse in 0.5% following hysterectomy. Various surgical procedures have been described for the repair of vault prolapse e.g. transvaginal sacrospinous colpopexy, transabdominal sacral colpopexy, Le Forte's operation, colpoclesis, posterior intravaginal sling plasty etc. The introduction of synthetic mesh like Prolene, Mersilene for the repair of vault prolapse have the advantage of tensile strength. In nulliparous prolapse and uterovaginal prolapse also, the supports of uterus are weakened, so there seems to be a definite advantage of mesh repair over sling surgeries.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A prospective study done in 50 patients with vault prolapse, Nulliparous prolapse and patients with UV prolapse who want to retain their menstrual and reproductive function were identified and repair of defects were done. 2 cases who underwent both hysterectomy and sacral colpopexy in two sittings were included in the study. They were followed up for a period of 6 weeks -29 months.
RESULTS
In the present study, the mean age for vault prolapse was 52.14 years, mean parity was 3.36. Vault prolapses were found to be more common after abdominal hysterectomy 60.97% compared to vaginal 39.02%. Common indication for hysterectomy is pelvic organ prolapse followed by DUB in this study. The mean time between the hysterectomy and vault prolapse in this study was 5.46 years. Importance should be given to proper enterocoele repair and vault suspense time of primary surgery. In this study incidence of smoking in vault prolapse cases was 34.14% significant. In cases of sacral colpopexy for vault prolapse in this study there were no major mesh related complications and the cure rate was 97.5%. So, sacral colpopexy with prolene mesh i.e. abdominal mesh repair can be employed as the primary surgery for vault prolapse. The safety and efficacy of hysterectomy and sacral colpopexy in the same sitting needs further evaluation. In this study of abdominal surgery with prolene mesh for conservative management of uterine prolapse, there was recurrence in 1 case, no mesh complications, no intraoperative complications, and 1 patient had abdominal discomfort.
CONCLUSION
In the present study, the safety and efficacy of abdominal mesh repair for vault prolapse and for conservative management of uterovaginal prolapse is proved.
