目的 探讨Prolift系统全盆底重建术在治疗盆腔脏器脱垂疾病中的应用价值及疗效。 方法 回顾性分析四川大学华西第二医院妇科2010年1月－2011年5月收治的119例盆腔脏器脱垂患者的临床资料，其中47例应用Prolift系统进行全盆底重建术（A组），51例应用曼氏手术治疗（B组），21例应用经阴道全子宫切除术+阴道前后壁修补术治疗（C组）。分析比较各组的临床近期疗效。术后随访1年。 结果 A、B、C组在手术时间、术中出血量、术后安置尿管天数、术后住院天数间差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。A组1例、B组11例、C组4例复发，A组与B、C组复发率比较差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。 结论 Prolift系统全盆底重建术安全性高，不增加脏器损伤的几率，且明显降低了患者的术后复发率，近期疗效肯定，是治疗盆腔脏器脱垂的一种理想术式。
Objective To explore the feasibility of transluminal dual plane ultrasound (TDPU) in evaluating the structure and function of pelvic floor muscle. Methods Non anorectal diseases patients who visited the Department of Medical Ultrasound, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, medical staff and medical staff’s relatives volunteers between May and November 2022 were selected. According to the criteria for ultrasound diagnosis of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and the pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) scoring criteria, the subjects were divided into normal group and POP group. The changes of the thickness of the left and right puborectalis muscle (PRM), the internal anal sphincter (IAS) and the external anal sphincter (EAS) at 3-, 6- and 9-o’clock, the depth and height of the perineal body (PB) were compared, and the changes of the elastic Young’s modulus of PRM, EAS and PB were compared through real-time shear wave elastography. Results A total of 192 subjects were included, including 140 in the normal group and 52 in the POP group. There were statistically significant differences between the POP group and the normal group in terms of gestational frequency, parity, and history of vaginal delivery (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in age, body mass index, menopausal history, and neonatal weight between the two groups (P>0.05). Under the condition of resting and maximum anal constriction, the thickness of PRM on the left and right sides of POP group was not significantly different from that of the normal group (P>0.05), but the elastic Young’s modulus of PRM on the left and right sides were lower than that of the normal group (P<0.05). At resting and maximum anal constriction, there was no significant difference in IAS thickness between the POP group and the normal group at 3-, 6- and 9-o’clock (P>0.05). At resting and maximum anal constriction, the thickness of deep and subcutaneous parts of EAS at 6-o’clock and the subcutaneous part of EAS at 9-o’clock in the POP group were smaller than those in the normal group (P<0.05). At resting and maximum anal constriction, the elastic Young’s modulus of EAS at 3-, 6- and 9-o’clock were lower than those in the normal group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the depth and height of PB between the POP group and the normal group at resting and maximum anal constriction (P>0.05). The elastic Young’s modulus of PB in the POP group was lower than that of the normal group (P<0.05). Under the condition of maximum anal constriction, the thickness of deep and subcutaneous parts of EAS at 3-o’clock in the POP group were lower than those in the normal group (P<0.05). Conclusion TDPU can quantitatively evaluate the structure and function of pelvic floor muscle through different states of resting and maximum anal constriction, and also can provide ultrasonic basis for the diagnosis and treatment of female pelvic floor dysfunction diseases.
Female pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD) is a common disease affecting women's quality of life, especially in older women. The establishment and application of multimodal evaluation system is the key to the accurate diagnosis and effective treatment of PFD. The purpose of this expert consensus is to provide a comprehensive, multi-layered assessment framework that includes clinical examinations, imaging examinations, biomechanical tests, and questionnaires to comprehensively assess pelvic floor function in women. By integrating different assessment methods, we aim to improve the early identification and diagnostic accuracy of PFD, so that personalized treatment can be developed to improve patient outcomes. The consensus also discusses the advantages and disadvantages of various assessment techniques and suggests directions for future research and clinical applications.