Sacrocolpopexy after sub-total hysterectomy vs. sacral hysteropexy for advanced urogenital prolapse: A propensity-matched study.
Hysteropexy
Sacropexy
mini-invasive surgery
pelvic organ prolapse
robotic surgery
urogynecology
Journal
International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics
ISSN: 1879-3479
Titre abrégé: Int J Gynaecol Obstet
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0210174
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Dec 2023
Historique:
revised:
27
05
2023
received:
07
12
2022
accepted:
08
06
2023
medline:
15
11
2023
pubmed:
29
6
2023
entrez:
29
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare objective and subjective outcomes of laparoscopic sacral colpopexy with supracervical hysterectomy (L-SCP) and robotic sacral hysteropexy (R-SHP). This is a multicenter retrospective propensity score matched study. In the period between January 2014 and December 2018, we enrolled 161 patients with apical prolapse stage 2 or above, alone or with multicompartment descensus. After propensity-match analysis, there were 44 women for each group. Patients of the two groups had similar preoperative characteristics. No difference was found in terms of estimated blood loss, hospital stay, operative time, and intraoperative or postoperative complications. Subjective success rate, 12 months after surgery, was statistically better in the L-SCP group (P = 0.034): 81.8% and 97.8% women had Patient Global Impression of Improvement scores less than 3, in R-SHP and L-SCP, respectively. The objective cure rate was high in both groups without any significant differences in recurrence rate (P = 0.266). Both procedures are safe and effective in pelvic organ prolapse treatment. Patients who no longer desire uterine preservation could be encouraged to consider L-SCP. R-SHP is an alternative in women who are strongly motivated to preserve their uterus in the absence of abnormal uterine findings.
Types de publication
Multicenter Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
847-853Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.
Références
Haylen BT, Maher CF, Barber MD, et al. An international Urogynecological association (IUGA) / international continence society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic organ prolapse (POP). NeurourolUrodyn. 2016;35:137-168.
Maher C, Baessler K, Glazener CMA, Adams EJ, Hagen S. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(3):CD004014.
Ginath S, Garely AD, Condrea A, Vardy MD. Mesh erosion following abdominal sacral colpopexy in the absence and presence of the cervical stump. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24:113-118.
Bradley S, Gutman RE, Richter LA. Hysteropexy: an option for the repair of pelvic organ prolapse. Curr Urol Rep. 2018;19:15.
Gracia M, Perelló M, Bataller E, et al. Comparison between laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy and subtotal hysterectomy plus cervicopexy in pelvic organ prolapse: a pilot study. NeurourolUrodyn. 2015;34:654-658.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A. Classification of surgical complications. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205-213.
Srikrishna S, Robinson D, Cardozo L. Validation of the patient global impression of improvement (PGI-I) for urogenital prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21:523-528.
Avery K, Donovan J, Peters TJ, Shaw C, Gotoh M, Abrams P. ICIQ: a brief and robust measure for evaluating the symptoms and impact of urinary incontinence. NeurourolUrodyn. 2004;23:322-330.
Derogatis LR, Rosen R, Leiblum S, Burnett A, Heiman J. The female sexual distress scale (FSDS): initial validation of a standardized scale for assessment of sexually related personal distress in women. J Sex Marital Ther. 2002;28:317-330.
Dal Moro F, Calpista A, Mancini M. ‘Cupid and psyche’: a novel technique for robotic Hysterosacropexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Urol J. 2016;83:27-30.
Ercoli A, Cosma S, Riboni F, et al. Laparoscopic nerve-preserving Sacropexy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017;24:1075-1077.
Lizee D, Campagna G, Morciano A, Panico G, Ercoli A, Gadonneix P. Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy: how to place the posterior mesh into rectovaginal space? NeurourolUrodyn. 2017;36:1529-1534.
Campagna G, Vacca L, Panico G, et al. Laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy versus laparoscopic sacral colpopexy plus supracervical hysterectomy in patients with pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33:33-368.
Korbly NB, Kassis NC, Good MM, et al. Patient preferences for uterine preservation and hysterectomy in women with pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209:470.e1-470.e6.
Oh S, Jeon MJ. How and on whom to perform uterine-preserving surgery for uterine prolapse. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2022;65:317-324.
Barber MD, Brubaker L, Nygaard I, et al. Defining success after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:600-609.
Li P-C, Ding D-C. Outcomes of laparoscopic hysteropexy and supracervical hysterectomy plus cervicopexy: a retrospective study. Tzu chi Med J. 2020;32:262.
Christmann-Schmid C, Bruehlmann E, Koerting I, Joerg K. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with or without midurethral sling insertion: is a two- step approach justified? A prospective study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018;229:98-102.
Baessler K, Christmann-Schmid C, Maher C, Haya N, Crawford TJ, Brown J. Surgery for women with pelvic organ prolapse with or without stress urinary incontinence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;8(8):CD013108.
Gagyor D, Kalis V, Smazinka M, Rusavy Z, Pilka R, Ismail KM. Pelvic organ prolapse and uterine preservation: a cohort study (POP-UP study). BMC Womens Health. 2021;21:72.
Mach P, Kaufold C, Rusch P, Kimmig R, Buderath P. Single-center study for robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacropexies: a one-fits-all strategy for pelvic organ prolapse? Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2022;306:2009-2015.
Seror J, Yates DR, Seringe E, et al. Prospective comparison of short-term functional outcomes obtained after pure laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. World J Urol. 2012;30:393-398.
Gutman R, Maher C. Uterine-preserving POP surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24:1803-1813.
Campagna G, Pedone Anchora L, Panico G, et al. Titanized polypropylene mesh in laparoscopic sacral colpopexy. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31:763-768.
Deffieux X, Letouzey V, Savary D, et al. Prevention of complications related to the use of prosthetic meshes in prolapse surgery: guidelines for clinical practice. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2012;165:170-180.