The Role of Laparoscopic Surgery in the Treatment of Advanced Uterine Prolapse: A Systematic Review of the Literature.
advanced pelvic organ prolapse
laparoscopic surgery
laparoscopy
severe pelvic organ prolapse
uterine prolapse
Journal
Cureus
ISSN: 2168-8184
Titre abrégé: Cureus
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101596737
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2021
Sep 2021
Historique:
accepted:
25
09
2021
entrez:
1
11
2021
pubmed:
2
11
2021
medline:
2
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The aim of this review is to investigate and compare all laparoscopic techniques that can be used in the surgical repair of advanced uterine prolapse. A systematic search of the PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases was performed for articles published up to December 2020, reporting data on the treatment of severe uterine prolapse using laparoscopic procedures. Only studies in the English language, with a patient sample of ≥20 and a follow-up time of ≥12 months were included. The final synthesis of this review consisted of six studies. The main laparoscopic procedures reported were vaginally assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy, vaginally assisted laparoscopic uterine sacropexy, laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy, laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension with uterine preservation, and laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension combined with trachelectomy. All procedures involved mesh placement, except for laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension. All procedures reported anatomical cure rates > 90%. Vaginally assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy had the largest amount of intraoperative blood loss whilst vaginally assisted laparoscopic uterine sacropexy was associated with bladder injuries intraoperatively. All vaginally assisted procedures reported cases of mesh extrusion postoperatively. Laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension was the operation with the longest mean operative and hospitalization time. Conversions were not reported. The present study shows that minimally invasive surgery can be used efficiently as an alternative to open surgery in the treatment of severe uterine prolapse.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34722059
doi: 10.7759/cureus.18281
pmc: PMC8544914
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
e18281Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021, Rountis et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2016 May-Jun;22(3):156-60
pubmed: 26571435
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2018 Jan;44(1):61-66
pubmed: 29121417
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014 Dec;183:33-6
pubmed: 25461349
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016 Feb;132(2):224-8
pubmed: 26613824
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2018 Nov;298(5):939-944
pubmed: 30255345
Int Urogynecol J. 2016 Jan;27(1):3-17
pubmed: 26249236
Lancet. 2005 Aug 6-12;366(9484):491-505
pubmed: 16084259
BMJ. 2009 Jul 21;339:b2700
pubmed: 19622552
Int J Surg. 2018 Jun;54(Pt A):28-34
pubmed: 29673691
Int Urogynecol J. 2018 Aug;29(8):1075-1079
pubmed: 29947819
J Urol. 2006 May;175(5):1769-72
pubmed: 16600755
Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2009 Sep;20(9):1013-21
pubmed: 19444367
Neurourol Urodyn. 2014 Mar;33(3):345-9
pubmed: 23729356
ANZ J Surg. 2003 Sep;73(9):712-6
pubmed: 12956787
Int Urogynecol J. 2019 Oct;30(10):1697-1703
pubmed: 30255195
Control Clin Trials. 1996 Feb;17(1):1-12
pubmed: 8721797
Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2016 Aug;71(7):435-42
pubmed: 27436178
Int Urogynecol J. 2015 Nov;26(11):1559-73
pubmed: 25966804
Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Sep;48(3):648-61
pubmed: 16012232
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Jul;175(1):10-7
pubmed: 8694033
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Dec;199(6):610.e1-5
pubmed: 18533115
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Mar;192(3):795-806
pubmed: 15746674
Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Oct;90(4 Pt 2):689-91
pubmed: 11770599
Int Urogynecol J. 2010 Jan;21(1):5-26
pubmed: 19937315
BMJ. 2016 Jul 20;354:i3853
pubmed: 27439423
Curr Opin Urol. 2016 Jul;26(4):302-8
pubmed: 27078126
Neurourol Urodyn. 2019 Nov;38(8):2031-2050
pubmed: 31452267
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Feb;184(3):297-302
pubmed: 11228477
Int Urogynecol J. 2013 May;24(5):839-45
pubmed: 23076648
Int Urogynecol J. 2016 Apr;27(4):655-84
pubmed: 26984443
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2013 Jun;27(3):363-79
pubmed: 23298608
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000 Aug;183(2):277-85
pubmed: 10942459
Int J Clin Oncol. 2017 Apr;22(2):340-346
pubmed: 27804040
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2016 Mar;293(3):617-24
pubmed: 26306984
Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Nov;134(5):e126-e142
pubmed: 31651832
Int Urogynecol J. 2013 Nov;24(11):1803-13
pubmed: 24142056
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Nov;221(5):483.e1-483.e11
pubmed: 31152711