English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objectives To compare the transvesical transabdominal repair of vesicovaginal fistula with novel extravesicaltransabdominal repair with respect to operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, catheterization time, postoperative lower urinary tract symptoms, urodynamic changes, and recurrence rate.Methods A prospective randomized controlled study of 94 consecutive female patients who underwenttransabdominal vesicovaginal fistula (VVF) repair from March 2013 to March 2018 in our center. The patientshad high vesicovaginal fistula that could not be operated on transvaginally: 47 cases were treated with extravesical transabdominal technique, and 47 cases were treated with transvesical transabdominal technique. The primary endpoint is the functional outcome regarding postoperative lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS); secondary outcomes are early recovery and success rates. The follow-up period was 3 months for reporting and dealing with any complications.Results There was no significant difference between the groups regarding demographic data. Extravesical repair of VVF had significantly higher (106.56±10.46 min) operating time than transvesical repair (95.08±7.6 min) P <0.001. There was no significant difference regarding intraoperative blood loss between the extravesical (365.42±81.29 mL) and transvesical (353.12±73.9 mL) groups; P = 0.44). The extravesical group had a significant shorter hospital stay (62.35±12.25 hours) than the transvesical repair group (85.07±12.0 hours) P < 0.001. Postoperative storage LUTS 6 weeks assessed by Overactive Bladder Symptom Score was significantly lower for extravesical repair (1.75±0.59) than for transvesical repair (6.87±2.24) P = 0.001). This was confirmed by urodynamic evaluation. Two patients (4.2%) in the transvesical group but none in the extravesical group experienced fistula recurrence.Conclusions The extravesical transabdominal approach for repair of vesicovaginal fistula is a novel, successful, and versatile technique with reduced hospital stay, reduced postoperative LUTS and possibly fewer recurrences than the transvesical technique, and should be considered for all VVF requiring abdominal repair.

Novel Extravesical Versus Transvesical Technique for Abdominal Repair of Vesicovaginal Fistula