Search

Your search keyword '"van Leeuwen, J H S"' showing total 3 results
Start Over Author "van Leeuwen, J H S" Publication Year Range Last 50 years
3 results on '"van Leeuwen, J H S"'

1. Transvaginal prolapse repair with or without the addition of a midurethral sling in women with genital prolapse and stress urinary incontinence : a randomised trial

Author

van der Ploeg, J M, Oude Rengerink, K, van der Steen, A, van Leeuwen, J H S, Stekelenburg, J, Bongers, M Y, Weemhoff, M, Mol, B W, van der Vaart, C H, Roovers, J-P W R, and Dutch Urogynaecology Consortium

Subjects
Questionnaires, Suburethral Slings, Urinary Bladder, Overactive, Urinary Incontinence, Stress, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Middle Aged, Midurethral sling, stress urinary incontinence, Pelvic Organ Prolapse, Multicenter Study, Gynecologic Surgical Procedures, Treatment Outcome, Randomized Controlled Trial, Journal Article, Humans, Female, randomised, Aged, Netherlands
Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare transvaginal prolapse repair combined with midurethral sling (MUS) versus prolapse repair only. DESIGN: Multi-centre randomised trial. SETTING: Fourteen teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. POPULATION: Women with symptomatic stage two or greater pelvic organ prolapse (POP), and subjective or objective stress urinary incontinence (SUI) without prolapse reduction. METHODS: Women were randomly assigned to undergo vaginal prolapse repair with or without MUS. Analysis was according to intention to treat. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome at 12 months' follow-up was the absence of urinary incontinence (UI) assessed with the Urogenital Distress Inventory and treatment for SUI or overactive bladder. Secondary outcomes included complications. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-four women were analysed at 12 months' follow-up (63 in MUS and 71 in control group). More women in the MUS group reported the absence of UI and SUI; respectively 62% versus 30% UI (relative risk [RR] 2.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.39-3.15) and 78% versus 39% SUI (RR 1.97; 95% CI 1.44-2.71). Fewer women underwent treatment for postoperative SUI in the MUS group (10% versus 37%; RR 0.26; 95% CI 0.11-0.59). In the control group, 12 women (17%) underwent MUS after prolapse surgery versus none in the MUS group. Severe complications were more common in the MUS group, but the difference was not statistically significant (16% versus 6%; RR 2.82; 95% CI 0.93-8.54). CONCLUSIONS: Women with prolapse and co-existing SUI are less likely to have SUI after transvaginal prolapse repair with MUS compared with prolapse repair only. However, only 17% of the women undergoing POP surgery needed additional MUS. A well-informed decision balancing risks and benefits of both strategies should be tailored to individual women.

Published
2015

2. Transvaginal prolapse repair with or without the addition of a midurethral sling in women with genital prolapse and stress urinary incontinence: a randomised trial

Author

Epi Methoden Team 1, Arts-assistenten DV&B, Arts-assistenten Kinderen, MS VPG/Gynaecologie, Other research (not in main researchprogram), van der Ploeg, J M, Oude Rengerink, K, van der Steen, A, van Leeuwen, J H S, Stekelenburg, J, Bongers, M Y, Weemhoff, M, Mol, B W, van der Vaart, C H, Roovers, J-P W R, Dutch Urogynaecology Consortium, Epi Methoden Team 1, Arts-assistenten DV&B, Arts-assistenten Kinderen, MS VPG/Gynaecologie, Other research (not in main researchprogram), van der Ploeg, J M, Oude Rengerink, K, van der Steen, A, van Leeuwen, J H S, Stekelenburg, J, Bongers, M Y, Weemhoff, M, Mol, B W, van der Vaart, C H, Roovers, J-P W R, and Dutch Urogynaecology Consortium

Published
2015

3. Transvaginal prolapse repair with or without the addition of a midurethral sling in women with genital prolapse and stress urinary incontinence: a randomised trial.

Author

van der Ploeg JM, Oude Rengerink K, van der Steen A, van Leeuwen JH, Stekelenburg J, Bongers MY, Weemhoff M, Mol BW, van der Vaart CH, and Roovers JP

Subjects
Aged, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Surveys and Questionnaires, Treatment Outcome, Urinary Bladder, Overactive prevention & control, Gynecologic Surgical Procedures methods, Pelvic Organ Prolapse surgery, Suburethral Slings statistics & numerical data, Urinary Incontinence, Stress surgery
Abstract

Objective: To compare transvaginal prolapse repair combined with midurethral sling (MUS) versus prolapse repair only., Design: Multi-centre randomised trial., Setting: Fourteen teaching hospitals in the Netherlands., Population: Women with symptomatic stage two or greater pelvic organ prolapse (POP), and subjective or objective stress urinary incontinence (SUI) without prolapse reduction., Methods: Women were randomly assigned to undergo vaginal prolapse repair with or without MUS. Analysis was according to intention to treat., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome at 12 months' follow-up was the absence of urinary incontinence (UI) assessed with the Urogenital Distress Inventory and treatment for SUI or overactive bladder. Secondary outcomes included complications., Results: One hundred and thirty-four women were analysed at 12 months' follow-up (63 in MUS and 71 in control group). More women in the MUS group reported the absence of UI and SUI; respectively 62% versus 30% UI (relative risk [RR] 2.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.39-3.15) and 78% versus 39% SUI (RR 1.97; 95% CI 1.44-2.71). Fewer women underwent treatment for postoperative SUI in the MUS group (10% versus 37%; RR 0.26; 95% CI 0.11-0.59). In the control group, 12 women (17%) underwent MUS after prolapse surgery versus none in the MUS group. Severe complications were more common in the MUS group, but the difference was not statistically significant (16% versus 6%; RR 2.82; 95% CI 0.93-8.54)., Conclusions: Women with prolapse and co-existing SUI are less likely to have SUI after transvaginal prolapse repair with MUS compared with prolapse repair only. However, only 17% of the women undergoing POP surgery needed additional MUS. A well-informed decision balancing risks and benefits of both strategies should be tailored to individual women., (© 2015 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.)

Published
2015
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results