Search

Copyright of Ginecología y Obstetricia de México is the property of Federacion Mexicana de Ginecologia y Obstetricia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: The impact of cervical cancer treatment on the quality of life of long-term survivors compared with the general female population is controversial, and no studies have been conducted comparing patients with benign gynecological diseases. The aim of this study was to compare the quality of life of cervical cancer survivors with that of healthy controls., Study Design: A case-control study was conducted to compare the quality of life of 106 cervical cancer survivors from a tertiary hospital and 185 women admitted to a gynecological outpatient clinic from the same health area for a healthy woman check-up (n 46) or for a benign gynecological disorder (symptomatic, n 113; asymptomatic, n 26). To measure quality of life, self-administered questionnaires, such as the Functional Assessment Cancer Therapy-cervix and World Health Organization quality of life-brief version, were employed. Baseline scores were collected when patients first reported, and further evaluations were completed at 0-6, 7-12, 13-24, 25-60, and more than 60 months. For the contrastive analysis hypothesis, we employed R statistical software., Results: Except for the environment domain at 0-6, 7-12, and 13-24 months (51.52 vs. 60.73, p < 0.0001; 52 vs. 60.73, p < 0.0001; 49.81 vs. 60.73, p < 0.0001, respectively), we found no statistically significant differences in the quality of life between cervical cancer survivors and controls. We did find differences in the physical health domain scores at 0-6 months (60.22 vs. 72.42, p = 0.039) and the social relationships domain scores at 13-24 months (54 vs. 71.42, p = 0.017) between cases and asymptomatic controls., Conclusion: Except for physical well-being, environment and social relationships, which were substantially better for controls, especially in the asymptomatic, long-term cervical cancer survivorśquality of life did not vary from that of controls., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

We sought to determine the prevalence of female sexual dysfunction (FSD) and to examine the influence of age, menopausal state and quality of life (QoL) on the female sexual function (FSF) of healthy women and those with benign gynaecological disease. With this purpose, we conducted a cross-sectional study, based on self-report questionnaires (sociodemographic, WHOQOL-BREF and FSFI), enrolling 107 women. Some 51.6% ( n  = 55) were diagnosed with FSD. We found no statistical significant differences between grouped reason for consultation and FSFI total score ( p  = .72) and its domains ( p  > .05). The results showed a negative strong correlation between age and FSFI total score (S= -0.71) and a positive moderate correlation between WHOQOL-BREF and FSFI total scores (S = 0.39). We observed statistically significant differences between menopausal state and FSFI total score ( p  = .001). In conclusion, the prevalence of FSD in our population was 51.6%. Our study results reveal that a reduction in FSFI scores has a negative impact on QoL and vice versa, regardless of the reason for consultation. Elderly age and postmenopausal state have deleterious effects on FSF.Impact statement What is already known on this subject? Poor QoL can adversely affect FSF and vice versa. The study of FSF is relatively recent and there is controversy regarding the deleterious effects of elderly age and menopause on FSF. The prevalence of FSD is difficult to precisely determine, given the studies' use of different definitions for FSD and the highly heterogeneous study populations, as well as the types of tests and questionnaires employed. Sexual difficulties are problems seldom discussed between patients and their physicians. Lack of time, misconceptions, shame and frustration, considering sexuality as too intimate to discuss in the doctor's office, uncertainty regarding therapeutic options and insufficient training of health professionals are just some of the reasons mentioned for not addressing sexual dysfunction in a general consultation. What do the results of this study add? Our study is the first research in Spain on the impact of age, menopause and QoL on gynaecological patients´ FSF. Our results indicate that an impaired FSF could be related to poorer well-being and QoL; however, benign gynaecological disease does not appear to affect FSF. Elderly age and postmenopausal state can have deleterious effects on FSF. What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Sexuality is an important aspect of QoL. Therefore, gynaecologists should discuss issues of sexuality with their patients in routine visits, especially in case of elderly and postmenopausal women. In addition, gynaecologists should train in the diagnosis and treatment of the female sexual dysfunction.

Background: Lymphatic disorders are frequent complications related to treatment for cervical cancer (CC). The aims of the study are to evaluate the impact of lymphatic disorders on quality of life (QOL) and sexuality in CC survivors after the completion of oncological treatment and to compare them with controls. Methods and Results: An ambispective cohort study was performed by using the Functional Assessment Cancer Therapy (FACT)-Cervix (Cx) fourth version, the World Health Organization Quality of Life-Brief Version (WHOQOL-BREF), and the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). Twelve patients affected by lymphatic disorders comprised the study group, 251 comprised the CC control group, and 185 comprised the non-CC control group. Regarding QOL, there were no statistically significant differences between the lymphatic disorder-unaffected and non-CC control groups, except in the WHOQOL-BREF environment domain. A weak positive correlation between lymphatic disorder and FACT-Cx additional concerns (σ = 0.135) was observed. Regarding sexuality, a weak negative correlation was detected between lymphatic disorders and FSFI sexual satisfaction (σ = -0.200) and a weak positive correlation was observed between lymphatic disorders and FSFI dyspareunia (σ = 0.148). We did not observe statistically significant differences in QOL satisfaction between the lymphatic disorder-affected and non-CC control groups. Symptomatic controls reported significantly higher physical health scores than the lymphatic disorder-affected group ( p  < 0.05). Regarding the psychological domain, the asymptomatic controls obtained significantly higher scores than the lymphatic disorder-affected group ( p  = 0.003). Conclusions: Lymphatic disorders notably influenced the QOL of CC survivors compared with the non-CC control groups. Lymphatic disorders had a significant negative impact on physical and psychological health. Sexuality was scarcely affected by lymphatic disorders.

The aim of this study was to determine whether direct trocar entry without prior pneumoperitoneum at umbilical level (DTI) can be a safe alternative to access the abdominal cavity in gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. We present a prospective observational analytical study of cohorts, comparing DTI with umbilical entry with trocar after previous insufflation with a Veress needle at umbilical level (V). The study period was performed from June 2013 to April 2016; data was collected on 600 patients who underwent gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. There were no significant differences in the risk of suffering a complication during the access manoeuvres between DTI (6.49%) and V (7.39%), OR 0.89 (95% CI: 0.42-1.81). The duration of the access manoeuvres was 69 s in DTI and 193 s in V ( p  < .001). The percentage of patients in whom two or more access attempts were performed was lower in DTI (7.8%) than in V (12.3%) ( p  > .05). We concluded that DTI is at least as safe as V, regarding the risk of suffering complications arising from access into the abdominal cavity. DTI has advantages with regard to V, such as: the shorter duration of access manoeuvres or the lesser number of unsuccessful entry or insufflation attempts. Impact statement What is already known on this subject? There are few international publications comparing DTI and V. When we conducted a search in PubMed for the terms 'Veress needle and direct trocar insertion', 51 publications were obtained. When we increased the restriction and added the terms 'laparoscopic entry and laparoscopy complications', 27 publications were obtained; thus, the uniqueness of our study. What do the results of this study add? We present a 3-year observational prospective study of cohorts that included 600 patients. The aim of this study was to determine that in laparoscopic gynaecological surgery, DTI is an access method to the abdominal cavity at least as safe as V, with respect to the risk of complications. On the other hand, DTI has some advantages such as the shorter duration of access manoeuvres or the lower number of failed entry attempts. What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Given the limited number of publications that compared both techniques, our study indicates that DTI can be a safe alternative for access to abdominal cavity in gynaecological surgery, compared to the traditional V.