Você pesquisou por y - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
You searched for:"Márcia Maria Dias"
We found (3) results for your search.
, , , , , Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2023;45(10):584-593
, , , , , , , , To evaluate the efficacy and outcomes of the surgical treatment for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in stages III and IV by sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) or uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS) by comparing anatomical and subjective cure rates and quality-of-life parameters (through the version validated for the Portuguese language of the Prolapse Quality of Life [P-QoL] questionnaire) under two definitions: genital prolapse Ba, Bp, and C< −1 (stage I) and Ba, Bp, and C ≤ 0 (stage II).
After we obtained approval from the Ethics Committee (under CAAE 0833/06) and registered the study in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT 01347021), 51 patients were randomized into two groups: the USLS group (N = 26) and the SSLF group (N = 25), with follow-up 6 and 12 months after the procedures.
There was a significant improvement in the P-QoL score and anatomical measurements of all compartments in both groups after 12 months (p< 0.001). The anatomical cure rates in the USLS and SSLF groups, considering stage 1, were of 34.6% and 40% (anterior) respectively; of 100% both for groups (apical); and of 73.1% and 92% (posterior) respectively. The rates of adverse outcomes were of 42% (N = 11) and 36% (N = 11) for the USLS and SSLF groups respectively (p = 0.654), and those outcomes were excessive bleeding, bladder perforation (intraoperative) or gluteal pain, and urinary infection (postoperative), among others, without differences between the groups.
High cure rates in all compartments were observed according to the anatomical criterion (stage I), without differences in P-QoL scores and complications either with USLS or SSLF for the surgical treatment of accentuated POP.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2023;45(10):584-593
, , , , , , , , To evaluate the efficacy and outcomes of the surgical treatment for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in stages III and IV by sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) or uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS) by comparing anatomical and subjective cure rates and quality-of-life parameters (through the version validated for the Portuguese language of the Prolapse Quality of Life [P-QoL] questionnaire) under two definitions: genital prolapse Ba, Bp, and C< −1 (stage I) and Ba, Bp, and C ≤ 0 (stage II).
After we obtained approval from the Ethics Committee (under CAAE 0833/06) and registered the study in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT 01347021), 51 patients were randomized into two groups: the USLS group (N = 26) and the SSLF group (N = 25), with follow-up 6 and 12 months after the procedures.
There was a significant improvement in the P-QoL score and anatomical measurements of all compartments in both groups after 12 months (p< 0.001). The anatomical cure rates in the USLS and SSLF groups, considering stage 1, were of 34.6% and 40% (anterior) respectively; of 100% both for groups (apical); and of 73.1% and 92% (posterior) respectively. The rates of adverse outcomes were of 42% (N = 11) and 36% (N = 11) for the USLS and SSLF groups respectively (p = 0.654), and those outcomes were excessive bleeding, bladder perforation (intraoperative) or gluteal pain, and urinary infection (postoperative), among others, without differences between the groups.
High cure rates in all compartments were observed according to the anatomical criterion (stage I), without differences in P-QoL scores and complications either with USLS or SSLF for the surgical treatment of accentuated POP.
, , , , , Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2022;44(2):194-200
, , , , , To analyze the existing scientific literature to find out if the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has an effect on gynecological health.
We performed an integrative review of articles published between April 2020 and April 2021 on the PubMed, SciELO, and LILACS databases, using COVID-19 and the following relevant terms: Menstrual change; Ovarian function; Violence against women; Contraception; HPV; Mental health; and Urogynecology.
Among the eligible studies found, editorials and primary research articles, which describe the dynamics between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) infection (the cause of the COVID-19 pandemic) and gynecological health, were included.
Through qualitative synthesis, data were extracted from the included publications and from guidelines of national and international societies of gynecology.
The 34 publications included in the present study showed that some factors of the SARS-CoV-2 infection, and, consequently, the COVID-19 pandemic, might be associated with menstrual abnormalities, effects on contraception, alterations in steroid hormones, changes in urogynecological care, effects on women’s mental health, and negative impact on violence against women.
The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the health of women. The scientific community encourages the development of recommendations for specialized care for women and strategies to prevent and respond to violence during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2022;44(2):194-200
, , , , , To analyze the existing scientific literature to find out if the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has an effect on gynecological health.
We performed an integrative review of articles published between April 2020 and April 2021 on the PubMed, SciELO, and LILACS databases, using COVID-19 and the following relevant terms: Menstrual change; Ovarian function; Violence against women; Contraception; HPV; Mental health; and Urogynecology.
Among the eligible studies found, editorials and primary research articles, which describe the dynamics between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) infection (the cause of the COVID-19 pandemic) and gynecological health, were included.
Through qualitative synthesis, data were extracted from the included publications and from guidelines of national and international societies of gynecology.
The 34 publications included in the present study showed that some factors of the SARS-CoV-2 infection, and, consequently, the COVID-19 pandemic, might be associated with menstrual abnormalities, effects on contraception, alterations in steroid hormones, changes in urogynecological care, effects on women’s mental health, and negative impact on violence against women.
The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the health of women. The scientific community encourages the development of recommendations for specialized care for women and strategies to prevent and respond to violence during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2018;40(8):477-490
To compare surgical treatments for stress urinary incontinence in terms of efficiency and complications.
We searched the MEDLINE and COCHRANE databases using the terms stress urinary incontinence, surgical treatment for stress urinary incontinence and sling. Selection of Studies Forty-eight studies were selected, which amounted to a total of 6,881 patients with scores equal to or higher than 3 in the Jadad scale.
Each study was read by one of the authors, added to a standardized table and checked by a second author. We extracted data on intervention details, follow-up time, the results of treatment and adverse events.
Comparing retropubic versus transobturator slings, the former was superior for both objective (odds ratio [OR], 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.54) and subjective (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.02-1.48) cures. Between minislings versus other slings, there was a difference favoring other slings for subjective cure (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39- 0.86). Between pubovaginal sling versus Burch surgery, there was a difference for both objective (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.50-2.77) and subjective (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.10-2.44) cures, favoring pubovaginal sling. Therewas no difference in the groups: midurethral slings versus Burch, pubovaginal sling versus midurethral slings, transobturator slings, minislings versus other slings (objective cure). Retropubic and pubovaginal slings are more retentionist. Retropubic slings have more bladder perforation, and transobturator slings, more leg and groin pain, neurological lesion and vaginal perforation.
Pubovaginal slings are superior to Burch colposuspension surgery but exhibit more retention. Retropubic slings are superior to transobturator slings, with more adverse events. Other slings are superior to minislings in the subjective aspect. There was no difference in the comparisons between midurethral slings versus Burch colposuspension surgery, pubovaginal versus midurethral slings, and inside-out versus outside-in transobturator slings.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2018;40(8):477-490
To compare surgical treatments for stress urinary incontinence in terms of efficiency and complications.
We searched the MEDLINE and COCHRANE databases using the terms stress urinary incontinence, surgical treatment for stress urinary incontinence and sling. Selection of Studies Forty-eight studies were selected, which amounted to a total of 6,881 patients with scores equal to or higher than 3 in the Jadad scale.
Each study was read by one of the authors, added to a standardized table and checked by a second author. We extracted data on intervention details, follow-up time, the results of treatment and adverse events.
Comparing retropubic versus transobturator slings, the former was superior for both objective (odds ratio [OR], 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.54) and subjective (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.02-1.48) cures. Between minislings versus other slings, there was a difference favoring other slings for subjective cure (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39- 0.86). Between pubovaginal sling versus Burch surgery, there was a difference for both objective (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.50-2.77) and subjective (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.10-2.44) cures, favoring pubovaginal sling. Therewas no difference in the groups: midurethral slings versus Burch, pubovaginal sling versus midurethral slings, transobturator slings, minislings versus other slings (objective cure). Retropubic and pubovaginal slings are more retentionist. Retropubic slings have more bladder perforation, and transobturator slings, more leg and groin pain, neurological lesion and vaginal perforation.
Pubovaginal slings are superior to Burch colposuspension surgery but exhibit more retention. Retropubic slings are superior to transobturator slings, with more adverse events. Other slings are superior to minislings in the subjective aspect. There was no difference in the comparisons between midurethral slings versus Burch colposuspension surgery, pubovaginal versus midurethral slings, and inside-out versus outside-in transobturator slings.
