Evidence Hub

Epidemiological profile, clinical characteristics, and surgical outcomes of genital fistula repair in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo: FisPro DRC Experience

Kasereka LW, Mavuzi P, Kibendelwa T, Muhini GM, Kanyali A, Muhawali JK, Kaseso D, Munyanderu AB

The Pan African medical journal, 2026

336 participants

Abstract

The objective of this study was to present the epidemiological profile, clinical characteristics, and surgical outcomes of women operated on for genital fistulas at the Medical Center Bolamu in Kinshasa by the Fistula Program DRC (FisPro DRC) from 2021 to 2025. It was a retrospective, descriptive analysis that included 336 women who underwent genital fistula repair between January 1, 2021, and June 30, 2025. Data were collected from patients´ medical records. The variables included demographics, fistula etiology, anatomoclinical diagnosis, and post-operative status assessed at the 14-day postoperative period before discharge. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 18.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). In our study population of 336 patients, the mean age was 42 years, and the average duration of the fistula was 9 years. A vast majority of patients (92.6%, n=311) had no prior surgical repair attempt. The primary etiology was obstetrical (67.0%, n=225), followed by iatrogenic causes (32.7%, n=110). Anatomically, the most prevalent types were vesicovaginal fistula (VVF) (40.8%, n=137) and perineal tears (40.5%, n=136). Following repair, a successful surgical outcome (closed and continent) was observed in 92.9% of cases (n=) at the 14-day postoperative assessment. Genital fistula is a real health challenge in Kinshasa, characterized by late presentation and severe lack of treatment access. The fistulas are caused particularly by obstetric and iatrogenic trauma.…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 336 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free