Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2010 Sep;21(9):1057-63.
doi: 10.1007/s00192-010-1163-8. Epub 2010 Apr 29.

Anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomized controlled trial of SIS graft versus traditional colporrhaphy

Paulo Cezar Feldner Jr  1 , Rodrigo Aquino Castro, Luiz Antonio Cipolotti, Carlos Antonio Delroy, Marair Gracio Ferreira Sartori, Manoel João Batista Castello Girão
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomized controlled trial of SIS graft versus traditional colporrhaphy

Paulo Cezar Feldner Jr et al. Int Urogynecol J. 2010 Sep.

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis: This study seeks to compare the small intestine submucosa (SIS) graft with traditional colporrhaphy (TC) for surgical treatment of anterior vaginal prolapse.

Methods: Subjects were randomly assigned to SIS (n = 29) or to TC (n = 27) preoperatively and outcomes analyzed at 12 months postoperatively. The primary outcome was the absence of POP-Q stage >or= II prolapse, and secondary outcome was improvement in quality of life. Data were compared with independent samples or paired Student's t test.

Results: SIS group had 86.2% anatomic cure compared to 59.3% in TC (p = 0.03). SIS improved point Ba measurement significantly (-1.93 cm versus -1.37 cm, p = 0.02). Both operations significantly improved quality of life, although there were no differences between the groups. We observed a greater number of complications in the SIS group, with no infections or erosion.

Conclusions: SIS repair improved point Ba significantly. However, there were no differences observed in quality of life between the techniques.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2006 Jun;17 Suppl 1:S51-5 - PubMed
    1. Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Nov;112(5):1131-42 - PubMed
    1. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Dec;185(6):1299-304; discussion 1304-6 - PubMed
    1. Urology. 2008 Nov;72(5):1036-9 - PubMed
    1. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2005 May-Jun;16(3):176-81; discussion 181 - PubMed

Publication types