Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Bowel preparation prior to minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial.
Sassani, Jessica C; Kantartzis, Kelly; Wu, Liwen; Fabio, Anthony; Zyczynski, Halina M.
Afiliación
  • Sassani JC; Division of Urogynecology, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Magee-Womens Hospital, 300 Halket Street, Pittsburgh, PA, 15218, USA. sassanijc@upmc.edu.
  • Kantartzis K; Banner University Medical Center, University of Arizona, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
  • Wu L; Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
  • Fabio A; Epidemiology Data Center, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
  • Zyczynski HM; Division of Urogynecology, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Magee-Womens Hospital, 300 Halket Street, Pittsburgh, PA, 15218, USA.
Int Urogynecol J ; 31(7): 1305-1313, 2020 07.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31773199
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION AND

HYPOTHESIS:

The objective was to determine if a bowel preparation prior to minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy (MIS) influences post-operative constipation symptoms. We hypothesized that women who underwent a bowel preparation would have an improvement in post-operative defecatory function.

METHODS:

In this randomized controlled trial, women undergoing MIS received a pre-operative bowel preparation or no bowel preparation. Our primary outcome was post-operative constipation measured by the Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms (PAC-SYM) 2 weeks post-operatively. Secondary outcomes included surgeon's perception of case difficulty. Both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analyses (PPA) were performed. Analyses were carried out using t test, Fisher's exact test, the Wilcoxon test and the Chi-squared test.

RESULTS:

Of 105 enrolled women, 95 completed follow-up (43 preparation and 52 no preparation). Baseline characteristics and rates of complications were similar. No differences were noted on ITT. The post-operative abdominal PAC-SYM subscale was closer to baseline for women who received a bowel preparation on PPA (change in score 0.74 vs 1.08, p = 0.045). Women who underwent a preparation were less likely to report strain (6.0% vs 26.7%, p = 0.009) or type 1 Bristol stool on their first post-operative bowel movement (4.3% vs 17.5%, p = 0.047). Surgeons were more likely to rate the complexity of the case as "more difficult than average" (54.4% vs 40.1%, p = 0.027) in those without a bowel preparation.

CONCLUSIONS:

Although there was no difference in ITT analysis, women who underwent a bowel preparation prior to MIS demonstrated benefit to post-operative defecatory function with a corresponding improvement in surgeon's perception of case complexity.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Estreñimiento Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Etiology_studies Límite: Female / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Int Urogynecol J Asunto de la revista: GINECOLOGIA / UROLOGIA Año: 2020 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Estreñimiento Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Etiology_studies Límite: Female / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Int Urogynecol J Asunto de la revista: GINECOLOGIA / UROLOGIA Año: 2020 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos