<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OJOG</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2160-8792</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ojog.2023.136085</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJOG-125506</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Medicine&amp;Healthcare</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Epidemiological and Therapeutic Aspects of Obstetric Fistula in 2021: A Review of 97 Cases at the Departmental University Hospital Centre of Borgou and Alibori in Benin
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Mahublo</surname><given-names>Vinadou Vodouhe</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jean</surname><given-names>de Dieu Yunga Foma</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kokou</surname><given-names>Isidore Gandaho</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Mathieu</surname><given-names>Zéssahou Kakpo</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sèdjro</surname><given-names>Raoul Atade</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bio</surname><given-names>Tamou Sambo</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Nouessewa</surname><given-names>Fanny Maryline Hounkponou</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kabibou</surname><given-names>Salifou</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Higher Institute of Medical Techniques (ISTM), Uvira, Democratic Republic of Congo</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff3"><addr-line>Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Parakou, Parakou, Benin</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Department of Mother-Child, Faculty of Medicine, University of Parakou, Parakou, Benin</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>08</day><month>06</month><year>2023</year></pub-date><volume>13</volume><issue>06</issue><fpage>1007</fpage><lpage>1019</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>14,</day>	<month>April</month>	<year>2023</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>6,</day>	<month>June</month>	<year>2023</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>9,</day>	<month>June</month>	<year>2023</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Background
  : Obstetric Fistula (OF) is a breach of the birth canal due to obstructed labor. It is a major public health problem in developing countries.
   
  <b>Objective</b>
  : Study the epidemiology and treatment of obstetric fistulas at 
  the 
  Departmental University Hospital Centre of Borgou and Alibori 
  (CHUD-B/A)
   in
   
  Parakou
  , 
  Benin.
   
  <b>Study Method</b>
  : 
  This was a descriptive and analytical cross-sectional study with prospective data collection on women treated during OF care missions from February 2020 to April 2021 in CHUD-B/A
   in
   Parakou
  , 
  Be
  nin. The data concerned their socio-demographic characteristics, obstetri
  c history, the clinic and therapeutic characteristics of their obstetric fistulas.
   
  <b>Results: </b>
  In total 97 patients with OF were treated during th
  e
   14-month period. The average age of the patients was 36.42 &#177; 11.75 years old. The patients were married (51.54%), without professional occupation (54.64%) and had no formal education (73.20%). The vesico
  -
  vaginal variety was predominating (54.64%). The fistulas were of Type I (46.39%), Type II (20.62%) and Type III (32.99%) according to the classification of Waaldjik Kees. The patients were operated 
  on 
  under spinal anesthesia (94.79%), 
  and 
  vaginally (55.67%) according to the principle of Chassar Moir (68, 60%). The associated procedures were lengthening urethroplasty (17.53%), 
  and 
  interposition of the Martius flap (1.03%). The overall success rate without Stress Urinary Incontinence was 71.13%. The factors associated with the failure of the fistula repair were: the nutritional status of the patients (p = 0.004), the previous repair failure (p = 0.001), the high size of the fistula (p = 0.007), the fistula severity (p &lt; 0.001), 
  and 
  a
   urethral reconstruction (p &lt; 0.001).
   
  <b>Conclusion</b>
  : OF is a relatively frequent pathology in Benin. Vesico-vaginal fistula is the most common form. The success rate of the surgical treatment is satisfactory
  ,
   but depend
  s
   on some factors.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Benin</kwd><kwd> Epidemiology</kwd><kwd> Obstetric Fistula</kwd><kwd> Treatment</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Obstetric Fistula (OF) is considered as one of the most serious and disabling complications related to childbirth, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), it is a breach in the birth canal due to difficult labor (dystocia) during childbirth delivery [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref1">1</xref>] . In the majority of cases, OF has a high incidence in developing countries, they are mainly a consequence of prolonged obstructed labour due to poor management leading to ischemic compression of the bladder neck by the fetal head wedged in the pelvis. It could also result from forceps delivery or caesarean section performed by an inexperienced or poorly trained operator [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref2">2</xref>] . Obstetric fistula has almost disappeared in developed countries because interventions are performed there on time, in the event of prolonged cessation of labour, usually caesarean sections [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref1">1</xref>] .</p><p>However, there is a major public health problem, according to the WHO, about 2 million women in the world are living with untreated obstetric fistula in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref1">1</xref>] . The incidence of OF is estimated at 0.32% of deliveries in French-speaking African countries, which represents about 5000 new cases per year (i.e. 40,000 to 50,000 fistula patients) for these thirteen countries [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref2">2</xref>] . There were 110,800 cases in Ethiopia in 2015 according to Maheu-Giroux et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref3">3</xref>] . In Benin, approximately 8 out of a thousand women of childbearing age reported to have had an obstetric fistula according to data from the National Institute of Statistics and Economic Analysis (INSAE) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref4">4</xref>] . This incidence is high compared to the regional frequency, in West Africa, which is 3 per 1000 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref3">3</xref>] . Women with obstetric fistula suffer from permanent incontinence, feel shame and are subject to social discrimination unless they are treated. This preventable condition also leads to long-term chronic medical problems, such as skin infections, kidney problems, and even death if left untreated [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref1">1</xref>] .</p><p>The objective of this study was to study the epidemiological characteristics and treatment of obstetric fistulas from February 2020 to April 2021 at the Departmental University Hospital Centre of Borgou and Alibori (CHUD-B/A) in Parakou, Benin.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Materials and Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Study Setting</title><p>The study took place in the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics of the Departmental University Hospital Centre of Borgou and Alibori (CHUD-B/A). This hospital is located in the city of Parakou in Benin.</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Study Design</title><p>This was a descriptive and analytical cross-sectional study with prospective data collection on women treated during OF care missions from February 2020 to April 2021 in CHUD-B/A, Parakou, Benin. We included all the women who had been treated during OF care missions at the Departmental University Hospital Centre of Borgou and Alibori during the study period, and who had given their consent to participate in the study.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. Data Collection</title><p>We reviewed the records of all the patients operated on who met the inclusion criteria. The expected sample size was the total number of cases operated on during these management campaigns at CHUD-B/A during the study period. Data were collected using questionnaire designed for this study through interviews of the patients during their admission, their medical records and the operating room registry.</p></sec><sec id="s2_4"><title>2.4. Study Variables</title><p>The dependent variable was obstetric fistula.</p><p>The independent variables were:</p><p>- Sociodemographic characteristics: origin, age of patients on admission, age at marriage, age at first delivery, height, weight, Body Mass Index (BMI), level of education, marital status before and after fistula, occupation before and after fistula.</p><p>- Obstetrical characteristics: parity at the time of occurrence of the fistula, parity, duration of labour, place of delivery, mode of delivery (vaginal route, cesarean section), condition of the newborn at birth (stillborn, alive, neonatal death), the sex of the newborn, the weight of the newborn.</p><p>- Characteristics of the fistula: age of the fistula, size of the fistula, number of previous treatments, site of the fistula, type of the fistula, associated lesions.</p><p>- Treatment and results: type of anesthesia, approach, type of treatment, surgical technique, overall success rate without Stress Urinary Incontinence (SUI).</p></sec><sec id="s2_5"><title>2.5. Data Processing and Analysis</title><p>Data entry was performed using Epidata 3.1 software and analysis was performed using Epidata analysis software.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Result</title><p>In the present study, 97 cases of obstetric fistulas were recorded over a period of 14 months.</p><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Sociodemographic Data</title><p>The average age of patients at the time of treatment was 36.42 &#177; 11.75 years with a range of 17 and 65 years. About 27.84% (27/97) of the patients had under 30 years old. Those who had no formal education represented 73.20% (n = 71) of cases. At the socio-economic level, more than 54.64% (n = 53) of the patients were without professional occupation. At the onset of OF, the proportion of married women went from 97.94% to 51.54%, i.e. a separation rate of 35.05% (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>). The patients came mainly from a rural area, i.e. 84.54% (n = 82). A proportion of 63.92% (62/97) of the patients came from the southern region of the country.</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> The socio-anthropometric characteristics and information source of patients with obstetric fistula at the Departmental University Hospital Centre of Borgou and Alibori (CHUD-B/A) in 2021</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Attendance</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage (%)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Age (years)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;30</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27.84</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >≥30</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >70</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >72.16</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BMI* (kg/m<sup>2</sup>)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Underweight (&lt;18.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.25</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Normal (18.5 - 24.99)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >68</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >70.10</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Overweight (25 - 29.99)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.43</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Obesity (≥30)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.22</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Area of Residence</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Urban</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15.46</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Rural</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >82</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >84.54</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Marital Status</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Before Fistula</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Married</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >95</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >97.94</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Single</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.06</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >After Fistula</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Married</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >51.54</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Single</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >48.45</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Occupation</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Employed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >44</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >45.36</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Unemployed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >54.64</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Information Source about OF**</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Non-Governmental Organization</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >40</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >41.24</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Health Workers</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >38</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39.18</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Media (Radio, Television)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26.80</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Neighbors</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.34</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>*Body Mass Index; **Obstetric Fistula.</p></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Obstetric Characteristics</title><p>The average parity was 2.5 &#177; 2.0, labor duration was superior to 24 hours in 75.26% of the patients and the predominant mode of delivery was maternal by emergency cesarean section in 58.76% of cases (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>).</p><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> The Gyneco-Obstetric history of the 97 patients admitted for obstetric fistulas at the Departmental University Hospital Centre of Borgou and Alibori (CHUD-B/A) in 2021</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Attendance</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage (%)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Reason for Consultation</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Urinary Discharge</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >89</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >91.75</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Anal Discharge</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.22</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Urinary + Anal Discharge</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.03</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Parity</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Primiparous</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25.77</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pauciparous (2 - 3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >30</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >30.93</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Multiparous (4 - 5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22.68</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Grand Multipara (≥6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.56</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Place of delivery</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Home Birth</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.03</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Health Center</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >96</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >98.97</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Duration of Childbirth Work</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;24 hours</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24.74</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >≥24 hours</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >73</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >75.26</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Length Lived with Fistula</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;12 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27.84</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >12 - 60 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.71</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >60 - 120 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37.11</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >&gt;120 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.34</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Circumstance of Occurrence of the Fistula</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Vaginal Birth</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27.83</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Instrumental Extraction</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.34</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Caesarean Section</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >57</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >58.76</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Caesarean Hysterectomy</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.40</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >New-born Condition</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Alive</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.89</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Perinatal Death</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >73</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >81.11</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Alternative Treatments Performed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Traditional Medicine</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >75</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >77.32</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Psychological Support</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.53</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap></sec><sec id="s3_3"><title>3.3. Anthropometric Characteristics</title><p>Patients with an obstetric fistula had an average weight of 53.78 &#177; 11.24 kg with a range of 35 and 89 kilogram. The average height of our patients was 1.53 &#177; 0.08 metre with range of 1.25 and 1.7. About 32.99% (n = 32) had a height of less than 1.50 metre. A proportion of 8.25% (8) of our patients were underweight. A proportion of 39.18% of the patients had married under the age of 18 years.</p></sec><sec id="s3_4"><title>3.4. Characteristics of Fistulas</title><p>The mean size of the fistulas was 1.9 &#177; 1.8 cm with extremes of 0.5 and 4 cm. The average time lived with the fistula was 72.29 months or about 6 years with extremes of 1 month and 480 months. Most patients (72.16%) had lived more than 12 months with the fistula. Associated lesions were ammoniacal dermatitis in 72.16% (n = 70) of cases, vaginal sclerosis in 28.87% (n = 28) of patients and genital mutilation 3.09% (n = 3) of patients (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>).</p><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of the 97 patients according to the characteristics related to their obstetric fistula at the Departmental University Hospital Centre of Borgou and Alibori (CHUD-B/A) in 2021</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Attendance</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage (%)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Multiple Fistula</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.34</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >86</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >88.66</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Waaldijk Classification</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >I</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46.39</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >II</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20.62</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >III</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >32</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >32.99</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fistula Size (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >57</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >58.76</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >≥2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >40</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >41.24</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Location of Fistula</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Vesico-uterine</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.52</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Vesico-vaginal</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >54.64</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Urethro-vaginal</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.49</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Uretero-vaginal</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Rectovaginal</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.09</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Condition of the Vaginal Tissue</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Soft Tissues</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >75</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >77.32</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sclerotic Tissues</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29.90</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Genital Mutilation</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.09</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >94</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >96.91</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Previous Repair of the Fistula</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.71</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >74</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >76.29</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap></sec><sec id="s3_5"><title>3.5. Therapeutic Data</title><p>Obstetric fistula repairs were performed under spinal anesthesia in a proportion of 94.79% (n = 91) and under general anesthesia in a proportion of 2.08% (n = 2). Spinal anesthesia was combined with general anesthesia in 3.13% (n = 3) of cases.</p><p>A proportion of 55.67% (n = 54) patients with an obstetric fistula had been treated surgically via the vaginal route in the supine position. The abdominal route involved 36.08% (n = 35) of patients. For 7.22% (n = 7) of the patients, the intervention had been performed by a mixed approach.</p><p>Fistulorraphy after splitting of the vesico-vaginal wall inspired by the principle of Chassar Moir was the most practiced with a frequency of 68.04% (66/97), uretero-vesical reimplantation in 11.34% (33/97) of case. One patient had been treated by simple indwelling bladder catheterization. The associated procedures were the interposition of a fatty flap from Martius in one patient (1.03%), vesico-urethral anastomosis in T (1.03%), and lengthening urethroplasty (17.53%). Rectovaginal fistulas were treated using the Musset technique.</p><p>We recorded a proportion of 19.59% (19/97) of postoperative complications. These complications were parietal suppuration 12.37% (12/97) or bleeding 7.21% (7/97).</p><p>The time taken to remove the probes was on average 14 days with extremes of 2 and 30 days. More than 2/3 (67.01%) of the patients had kept their catheter between 10 and 14 days.</p></sec><sec id="s3_6"><title>3.6. Outcomes of Treatment</title><p>The overall success rate was 78.35%. About 2.63% of recovered cases had Stress Urinary Incontinence (SUI). The factors associated with the failure of obstetric fistula repair were: The nutritional status of patients (p = 0.004), a previous repair failure (p = 0.001), the large size of the fistula (p = 0.007), the fistula severity (p &lt; 0.001), a urethral reconstruction (p &lt; 0.001; PR &gt; 1) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref>).</p><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> Factors associated with failed repair of obstetric fistula at the Departmental University Hospital Centre of Borgou and Alibori (CHUD-B/A)</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >N</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >OF Cure Failure</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >PR</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >95% CI</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >p</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >n</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BMI</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Underweight (&lt;18.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.25</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.64 - 11.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Normal (18.5 - 24.99)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >68</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.76</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Overweight (25 - 29.99</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >42.86</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.64</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.50 - 8.86</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Obesity (≥30)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >42.86</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.64</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.24 - 10.67</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Genital Mutilation</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.355</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >94</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22.34</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >OF* Previous Repair Failure</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47.83</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.54</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.73 - 7.25</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >74</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.51</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >OF* Severity</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >I</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.07</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.33 - 3.48</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >II</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >55.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.40</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.62 - 11.95</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >III</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >32</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >OF* Size (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.007</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >57</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >≥2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >40</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.85</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.27 - 6.42</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Simple Fistulorraphy</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.334</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.39</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.68</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.31 - 1.50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >51</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25.49</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Reconstruction of the Urethre</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >76.47</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.65</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.77 - 15.53</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >80</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Ureteral Reimplantation</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.064</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >86</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24.42</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>*Obstetric Fistula.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><p>Mean patients age at the time of OF treatment was 36.42 &#177; 11.75 years with extremes of 17 and 65 years. This average age is like that reported by Tebeu et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref5">5</xref>] in Cameroon and Salifou et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref6">6</xref>] in Benin which were respectively 36.2 &#177; 14.3 years and 36.6 &#177; 10.5 years. However, it is higher than those reported by Nsambi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref7">7</xref>] , which were 27.96 &#177; 10.37 years. The age difference would be due to the period of management after the occurrence of fistulas, which is as longer as the subsidies are not quickly available. The subsidies come from different strategies for the management of obstetric fistulas implemented in these countries. Educationally, patients with no formal education represented 73.20% (n = 71) of cases. This frequency is similar to that reported by Diallo et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref8">8</xref>] in Guinea which was 66.4%. However, it is lower than those reported by Salifou et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref6">6</xref>] in Benin, Nsambi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref7">7</xref>] in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Aristide Kabor&#233; et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref9">9</xref>] which were respectively 81.1%; 94.7%; and 92.5%. This better level of education in our series could be explained by the efforts African countries including Benin to promote education and literacy for all.</p><p>At the socio-economic level, more than half of the patients, or 54.77%, were unemployed housewives. Many women lose their jobs after the onset of obstetric fistula. Loss of employment appears to be an economic consequence of fistula. Obstetric fistula is a condition that aggravates precariousness.</p><p>The separation rate of couples in this series was high 35.05%. This rate was similar to those reported by Salifou et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref6">6</xref>] in Benin and Aristide Kabor&#233; et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref9">9</xref>] in Burkina Faso, which were 32.4% and 32.4% respectively. Conjugal dislocation, in particular the abandonment of the patient, is one of the serious psychosocial consequences of OF.</p><p>The patients mainly came from a rural area, i.e. 84.54%. Salifou et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref6">6</xref>] reported in Benin that 81.1% patients came from rural areas. In the series of Diallo et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref8">8</xref>] in Guinea, all women came from remote rural areas. Rural areas are characterized by a lack of technical equipment, infrastructure, and qualified personnel for the administration of health care, socio-cultural and religious mores which explain the delay in accessing quality care.</p><p>The main sources of information and orientation of patients on the treatment of fistula were Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) (41.24%). This advanced strategy indeed appears to be ideal for better reaching women suffering from OF, as observed in the work of Diallo et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref8">8</xref>] .</p><p>A proportion of 25.77% of patients were at their first delivery. In the literature, obstetric fistula predominates in primiparous women. Umoiyoho et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref10">10</xref>] in Nigeria in 2012 and Nsambi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref7">7</xref>] in the Democratic Republic of Congo reported respectively 80.9% and 90.9% primipara in their series. Other studies, on the other hand, had noted a predominance of multiparas: Salifou et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref6">6</xref>] (73%). Parity does not appear to be a risk factor for the occurrence of Obstetric Fistula (OF), although primiparity associated with young maternal age expose to a higher risk of OF due to pelvic immaturity.</p><p>The majority of our patients had given birth in a health structure 98.97% after a prolonged childbirth work. Salifou et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref6">6</xref>] also reported a high proportion of births in a health center (83.8%). Contrary to these studies, other authors reported high rates of home birth: 70% for Nsambi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref7">7</xref>] .</p><p>A proportion of 75.26% of our patients had had a duration of labor delivery greater than 24 hours. Nsambi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref7">7</xref>] noted that 87.6% of patients in their study had a labor of more than 24 hours [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref11">11</xref>] . Sori et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref12">12</xref>] in Ethiopia reported more than 48 hours of labor in 79.2% of their patients. According to Meyer et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref13">13</xref>] childbirth is complicated by fistula due to financial, cultural, and geographical reasons that prevent the woman from benefiting from quality care during childbirth.</p><p>The fistula was secondary to an emergency caesarean section in a high proportion: 58.76% cases in this study. Salifou et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref6">6</xref>] , Roka et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref11">11</xref>] noted respectively 70.3% and 60% cesarean rate in their series. The ischemia having already been established, the caesarean could not avoid the fistula, and was only performed for maternal salvage, as evidenced by the high rate of stillbirths. The causal pregnancy ended in a stillbirth in 68.37% of cases with a clear predominance of 69.39% of male newborns. In the literature, perinatal mortality is also high: Roka et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref11">11</xref>] and Nsambi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref7">7</xref>] had respectfully reported 78.6% and 93.4%. The observed male predominance of stillbirths would be linked to the tendency for macrosomia, of which the male sex is one of the predictive factors.</p><p>The patients had a mean weight of 53.78 &#177; 11.24 kg. Nearly half of the patients 45 (46.39%) weighed less than 50 kg. These results corroborate those reported by other authors: For Lewis Wall et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref14">14</xref>] , the average weight was 43.6 kg and 55% of patients weighed less than 50 kg.</p><p>The average height of our patients was low 1.53 &#177; 0.08 metre and a proportion of 32.99% (n = 32) of them had short stature (height &lt; 1.50 metre). Other studies had reported high proportions of short women in their series: In the series by Nsambi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref7">7</xref>] in the DRC, the average height was low 145.1 &#177; 7.1 cm and 73.2% of patients were of short stature. The average height in the series by Holme et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref15">15</xref>] was 148 cm. Most authors recognize that short stature is a predictor of obstructed labor: Lewis Wall et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref14">14</xref>] and Le Le Duc et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref16">16</xref>] .</p><p>In our series, there was a proportion of 8.25% lean patient (BMI &lt; 18.5 kg/m<sup>2</sup>). This stature weight deficit found in other studies on obstetric fistulas would be due to malnutrition and early pregnancies occurring before the end of puberty, precociously reducing growth [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref17">17</xref>] .</p><p>In the present study, Type I fistulas according to the classification of Waaldijk Kees 46.39% predominated. The Vesico-Vaginal Fistula (VVF) variety was the most represented 54.64%. The series by Kabor&#233; et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref9">9</xref>] , Salifou et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref6">6</xref>] also noted a predominance of the vesico-vaginal form of 70.6% and 62.2% respectively. It appears that VVF is the most commonly encountered form of obstetric fistula. Recto-Vaginal Fistulas (RVFs) are rare.</p><p>The average size of obstetric fistulas was 1.9 &#177; 1.8 cm. It was 2.47 &#177; 1.46 cm according to Nsambi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref7">7</xref>] . This variation in the dimensions of the fistula could be explained by several factors, in particular the duration of labor and the surface area of the compressed tissues.</p><p>The majority of patients (72.16%) had lived more than 12 months with the fistula. The average time lived with the fistula was 72.29 months or about 6 years. This average is similar to those reported by Tebeu et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref5">5</xref>] and Nsambi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref7">7</xref>] respectively 8.5 years and 4.97 &#177; 4.76 years. It is lower than the result of Diallo et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref8">8</xref>] in Guinea: 11 years. Several factors could explain this variation in the duration lived with the fistula according to the studies: On the one hand the stigmatizing character of the pathology pushing the patients to isolation, the long clinical tolerance of the disease, the ignorance of the existence of a surgical management of the affection, the lack of financial means. On the other hand, through awareness-raising by local NGOs, healthcare personnel via the media, community relays, and free care campaigns, these women, as well as those around them.</p><p>In our series, the main mode of anesthesia performed was spinal anesthesia 94.79% (n = 91). Several other studies have noted similar results. The series by Nsambi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref7">7</xref>] and Sori et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref12">12</xref>] respectively reported 99% and 70.8% spinal anesthesia performed. There are many reasons for choosing this locoregional anesthesia. It allows effective and reliable anesthesia of the lower part of the trunk and lower limbs, reduces the postoperative consequences induced by general anesthesia, preserves the patient’s lucidity, and allows her to eat early postoperatively.</p><p>A proportion of 55.67% of patients had been treated surgically via the vaginal route in the supine position. These results are comparable to those of Cisse et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref18">18</xref>] in Mali and Moudouni et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref19">19</xref>] where respectively, the vaginal approach was used in 100% and 70% of patients. The priority given to this vaginal route can be explained by the fact that in most obstetric fistulas it gives good operating comfort, direct access to lesions of the cervix and urethra, reduces the risk of complications, leads to less bleeding, rapid postoperative recovery and short hospital stay [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref2">2</xref>] .</p><p>Regarding the operative techniques used, fistulorraphy inspired by the principle of Chassar Moir was the most practiced with a frequency of 68.04%. Niassy et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref17">17</xref>] noted a similar frequency of 78.9% fistulorraphy according to the Chassar Moir principle. This surgical technique remains the most used approach, because it is simple, less demanding, with a low risk of complications.</p><p>The overall success rate without SUI was 71.13%. A proportion of 2.63% of cases have had the fistula closed and presented with minor Stress Urinary Incontinence (SUI). This success rate is similar to those of several other authors including Holme et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref15">15</xref>] , and Salifou et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref6">6</xref>] respectively 72.9% and 68.6%. It is lower than those of Kpatcha et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref20">20</xref>] and Nsambi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref7">7</xref>] who noted overall success rates of 78.10% and 86% respectively. Our results are satisfactory but could be improved thanks to the experience of the surgeons.</p><p>In our series, the factors associated with the failure of surgical repair of obstetric fistulas were the nutritional status of patients (p = 0.004), a previous cure failure (p = 0.001), the large size of the fistula (p = 0.007), fistula severity (p &lt; 0.001), urethral reconstruction (p &lt; 0.001; PR &gt; 1). These factors are similar to those mentioned by Niassy et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref17">17</xref>] , which were the low rate of previous operations and the large number of fistulas without damage to the continence systems, the experience of the teams. For Nsambi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.125506-ref7">7</xref>] , the healing rate of obstetric fistulas was determined by the site of the fistula, the degree of healing, previous repair attempts, the technique of fistulorraphy and the expertise of the surgeon, equipment and post-operative nursing care among others. We deduce that the success rate of obstetric fistula surgery varies from center to center and depends on several factors.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Conclusion</title><p>Obstetric fistula remains a serious public health problem in Benin. The overall success rate of the surgical cure was satisfactory. Certain factors are associated with failure and will need to be considered in treatment strategies. The prevention of Obstetric Fistula requires refocused prenatal consultations and childbirth assisted by qualified personnel.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Vodouhe, M.V., Yunga Foma, J. de D., Gandaho, K.I., Kakpo, M.Z., Atade, S.R., Tamou Sambo, B., Hounkponou, N.F.M. and Salifou, K. (2023) Epidemiological and Therapeutic Aspects of Obstetric Fistula in 2021: A Review of 97 Cases at the Departmental University Hospital Centre of Borgou and Alibori in Benin. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 13, 1007-1019. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojog.2023.136085</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.125506-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">UNFPA (2020) Fistule obstétricale et autres formes de fistules génitales féminines.  
https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/FR%20ObstetricFistulaManual%2020211230_0.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Pereira, H., Haillot, O. and Lansac, J. (2011) Fistules Urinaires. In: Lansac, J., Body, G. and Magnin, G., Eds., La Pratique Chirurgicale en Gynécologie Obstétrique, 3rd Edition, Elsevier-Masson, Paris, 447-462.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-2-294-02095-7.50019-6</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Maheu-Giroux, M., Filippi, V., Samadoulougou, S., Castro, M.C., Maulet, N., Meda, N., et al. (2015) Prevalence of Symptoms of Vaginal Fistula in 19 Sub-Saharan Africa Countries: A Meta-Analysis of National Household Survey Data. The Lancet Global Health, 3, E271-E278. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(14)70348-1 
https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2214109X14703481</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">INSAE (2017) EDS_Santé de la Reproduction_Connaissance et prévalence de la fistule obstétricale. Benin Data Portal. 
https://benin.opendataforafrica.org/yvgsdwd/eds-sant%C3%A9-de-la-reproduction-connaissance-et-pr%C3%A9valence-de-la-fistule-obst%C3%A9tricale</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tebeu, P.M., Fomulu, J.N., Mbassi, A.A., Tcheliebou, J.M., Doh, A.S. and Rochat, C.H. (2010) Quality Care in Vesico-Vaginal Obstetric Fistula: Case Series Report from the Regional Hospital of Maroua-Cameroon. Pan African Medical Journal, 5, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.4314/pamj.v5i1.56192</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Salifou, K., Dayi, A., Hounkponou, F., Tamou, S., Sidi, I.R. and Alihonou, E. (2018) Obstetrical Fistula: Clinical, Therapeutic and Prognostic Aspects at the Gynecology and Obstetrics Department of Borgou University Hospital Center in Benin. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 8, 1052-1062.  
https://doi.org/10.4236/ojog.2018.811106</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Nsambi, J.B., Mukuku, O., Foma Yunga, J.-de-D., Kinenkinda, X., Kakudji, P., Kizonde, J., et al. (2018) Fistules obstétricales dans la province du Haut-Katanga, République Démocratique du Congo: à propos de 242 cas. Pan African Medical Journal, 29, Article 34. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2018.29.34.14576  
http://www.panafrican-med-journal.com/content/article/29/34/full/</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Diallo, A.B., Sy, T., Bah, M.D., Diallo, T.M.O., Barry, M.S., Bah, I., et al. (2016) Fistules vésico-vaginales obstétricales en Guinée: Analyse des données de 3 sites de prise en charge de l’ONG Engender Health. Progrès en Urologie, 26, 145-151.  
https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1166708716000208  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.purol.2016.01.006</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Aristide Kaboré, F., Kambou, T., Ouattara, A., Zango, B., Yaméogo, C., Kirakoya, B., et al. (2014) Aspects épidémiologiques, étiologiques et impact psychosocial des fistules urogénitales dans une cohorte de 170 patientes consécutives, prises en charge dans trois centres du Burkina Faso de 2010 à 2012. Progrès en Urologie, 24, 526-532.  
https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1166708714000694  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.purol.2014.03.001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Umoiyoho, A.J., Inyang-Etoh, E.C. and Etukumana, E.A. (2012) Obstetric Fistula Repair: Experience with Hospital-Based Outreach Approach in Nigeria. Global Journal of Health Science, 4, 40-45. https://doi.org/10.5539/gjhs.v4n5p40 
http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/gjhs/article/view/17225</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Roka, Z.G., Akech, M., Wanzala, P., Omolo, J., Gitta, S. and Waiswa, P. (2013) Factors Associated with Obstetric Fistulae Occurrence among Patients Attending Selected Hospitals in Kenya, 2010: A Case Control Study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 13, Article No. 56. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-13-56  
https://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2393-13-56</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sori, D.A., Azale, A.W. and Gemeda, D.H. (2016) Characteristics and Repair Outcome of Patients With Vesicovaginal Fistula Managed in Jimma University Teaching Hospital, Ethiopia. BMC Urology, 16, Article No. 41.  
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-016-0152-8  
http://bmcurol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12894-016-0152-8</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Meyer, L., Ascher-Walsh, C.J., Norman, R., Idrissa, A., Herbert, H., Kimso, O., et al. (2007) Commonalities among Women Who Experienced Vesicovaginal Fistulae as a Result of Obstetric Trauma in Niger: Results from a Survey Given at the National Hospital Fistula Center, Niamey, Niger. American Journal of Obstetrics &amp; Gynecology, 197, 90.e1-90.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2007.03.071  
https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0002937807004395</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Lewis Wall, L., Karshima, J.A., Kirschner, C. and Arrowsmith, S.D. (2004) The Obstetric Vesicovaginal Fistula: Characteristics of 899 Patients from Jos, Nigeria. American Journal of Obstetrics &amp; Gynecology, 190, 1011-1016.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2004.02.007 
https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0002937804001279</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Holme, A., Breen, M. and MacArthur, C. (2007) Obstetric Fistulae: A Study of Women Managed at the Monze Mission Hospital, Zambia. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics &amp; Gynaecology, 114, 1010-1017.  
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01353.x 
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01353.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Le Duc, A., Dumurgier, C.L. and Falandry, L. (2013) Prise en charge chirurgicale des fistules obstétricales en Afrique African Obstetric Fistulas Care. E-Mémoires de l’Académie Nationale de Chirurgie, 12, 76-78.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Niassy, A.C.B., Niang, L.A., Diallo, M.B., Jalloh, M.A., Ndoye, M.A., Labou, I.A., et al. (2019) Missions chirurgicales de prise en charge des fistules obstétricales en Afrique subsaharienne. Aspects épidémiologiques, cliniques et thérapeutiques. Uro’Andro, 2, 15-19.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Cisse, C.T., Mbaye, M., Faye Dieme, M.E., Traore, A.L. and Moreau, J.C. (2003) Threatened Preterm Labour: Assessment of Its Management at the Dakar University Teaching Hospital. Dakar Médical, 48, 123-127.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Moudouni, S., Nouri, M., Koutani, A., Attya, A., Hachimi, M. and Lakrissa, A. (2001) Les fistules vésico-vaginales obstétricales. A propos de 114 cas. Progrès en Urologie, 11, 103-108.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.125506-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kpatcha, T.M., Wangala, P., Botcho, G., Tchandana, M., Nembuzu, D. and Aboubakari, A.S. (2020) Profil épidémiologique, anatomoclinique et thérapeutique des fistules urogénitales et rectovaginales au Togo. Progrès en Urologie, 30, 597-603.  
https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1166708720302293  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.purol.2020.06.008</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>