Which Surgical Technique Should be Preferred to Repair Benign, Primary Vesicovaginal Fistulas?

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorGedik, Abdullah
dc.contributor.authorDeliktas, Hasan
dc.contributor.authorCelik, Nurettin
dc.contributor.authorKayan, Devrim
dc.contributor.authorBircan, Mehmet Kamuran
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-24T17:40:01Z
dc.date.available2024-04-24T17:40:01Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.departmentDicle Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To evaluate and compare the outcomes of benign, primary vesicovaginal fistulas (VVFs) treated using the transabdominal transvesical technique and the transvaginal technique without tissue interposition. Materials and Methods: A total of 53 consecutive women with VVF who were treated between September 1999 and October 2014 were evaluated retrospectively. Patients with a malignant etiology and/or prior irradiation were excluded because they required a more complex repair. In the first group, the repair was performed using the transabdominal transvesical technique (n = 28). After one of our fellows had completed his urogynecology training, he began to perform the repairs using the transvaginal technique (n = 25). All included VVF patients were treated without a tissue interposition. Results: Vesicovaginal fistula repair was performed in 53 patients, with a mean age of 41.4 +/- 15.2 years. There was no significant difference in terms of the patients' age, fistula size, and the number of deliveries between the groups. All cases failed in terms of conservative management. The size of the fistulas ranged from 15 to 20 mm. The admission time was between 3 days and 21 years, and it was longer in less educated patients. The success rate was 96.4% (27/28) in the transabdominal transvesical group and 100% (25/25) in the transvaginal group (P = 1.00). The hospitalization period and complications were significantly reduced in the transvaginal group (P = .00 and P = .004, respectively). No patients converted from a transvaginal to a transabdominal repair. There was only one recurrence in the transabdominal transvesical group. The patients were followed up for 1 year. Conclusion: Transvaginal repair of benign, primary VVFs is more advantageous than transabdominal transvesical repair. There was a significant decrease in the hospitalization period and complications rates using the transvaginal technique without tissue interposition.en_US
dc.identifier.endpage2427en_US
dc.identifier.issn1735-1308
dc.identifier.issn1735-546X
dc.identifier.issue6en_US
dc.identifier.pmid26706739
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84952053826
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3
dc.identifier.startpage2422en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11468/21537
dc.identifier.volume12en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000368321800008
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherUrol & Nephrol Res Ctr-Unrcen_US
dc.relation.ispartofUrology Journal
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectVesicovaginal Fistulaen_US
dc.subjectSurgeryen_US
dc.subjectRetrospective Studiesen_US
dc.subjectTreatment Outcomeen_US
dc.subjectGynecologic Surgical Proceduresen_US
dc.subjectMethodsen_US
dc.titleWhich Surgical Technique Should be Preferred to Repair Benign, Primary Vesicovaginal Fistulas?en_US
dc.titleWhich Surgical Technique Should be Preferred to Repair Benign, Primary Vesicovaginal Fistulas?
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu