Title |
Genitourinary Fistula: An Indian Perspective
|
---|---|
Published in |
The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India, January 2015
|
DOI | 10.1007/s13224-015-0672-2 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Vinod Priyadarshi, Jitendra Pratap Singh, Malay Kumar Bera, Anup Kumar Kundu, Dilip Kumar Pal |
Abstract |
In developing countries, obstetric trauma is the most common cause of genitourinary fistulae. But over the last two decades, health care facilities have been improved and the scenario has been changed. The aim of the present study is to share our experience with genitourinary fistula in terms of mode of presentation, diagnostic modality, and management with the emphasis on the surgical approach and a parallel review of the available literature. During a 6-year period from January 2007 to December 2013, 41 cases of genitourinary fistula, who admitted and treated in the urology department of a tertiary care center, were retrospectively analyzed for etiology, site, size and number of fistulae, clinical presentation, diagnostic modalities, and management. The literature search was done using the Medline database. Mean age of the patient was 27 years (range 16-51). Primary and simple fistulae were common. Obstetric trauma was the most common etiology (56.09 %) followed by iatrogenic (39.03 %). Vesicovaginal fistula was the most common type (78.37 %) and trigone was the most common site involved (51.72 %). 51.35 % of patients were approached successfully by the vaginal route. Ancillary procedures were required in patients for various other associated anomalies at the time of fistula repair. The success rate on follow up was 94.5 %. In the mean follow up of 3 years, 35 patients were sexually active. Genitourinary fistula is a frustrating entity with potentially devastating psychosocial consequence. Its management poses a tricky challenge to the surgeon. Accurate and timely diagnosis, adhering on basic surgical principle, and repair by an experienced surgeon provide the optimum chance of cure. |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 6 | 27% |
Researcher | 4 | 18% |
Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 9% |
Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
Other | 2 | 9% |
Unknown | 4 | 18% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 41% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 14% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 5% |
Linguistics | 1 | 5% |
Other | 4 | 18% |
Unknown | 3 | 14% |