Sacrospinous fixation versus uterosacral ligament suspension in managing apical prolapse

被引:0
作者
McDonald, Jodie [1 ]
Salehi, Omar [1 ]
Sathianathen, Niranjan [1 ]
Dowling, Caroline [2 ]
Elmer, Sandra [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Royal Melbourne Hosp, Dept Urol, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[2] Monash Univ, Eastern Hlth Clin Sch, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[3] Epworth Med Fdn, Dept Surg, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
关键词
Apical pelvic organ prolapse; Surgical; Robotic; Transvaginal; Mesh-free; VAULT SUSPENSION; SURGERY;
D O I
10.1007/s00345-025-05563-y
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose To compare and assess the safety of two mesh-free surgical techniques in managing apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP); robot assisted/laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS) and vaginal sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF). Methods We performed a retrospective review of 116 women with apical POP who underwent USLS (n = 61) or SSLF (n = 55) by a single surgeon. Demographic data including age, parity, previous POP surgery was recorded. A pre-operative pelvic floor questionnaire was used to identify prevalence of bladder, bowel and vaginal symptoms. POP Quantification system (POP-Q) scores were recorded at surgery and at post-operative reviews. The absolute change in POP-Q scores were recorded as objective measures of pelvic floor support. Other post-operative metrics used include the presence of vaginal bulge, need for repeat POP surgery (re-operation) and subjective improvement in symptoms based on a patient-reported outcome measures survey. Post-operative adverse events were recorded using the Clavien-Dindo grading scale. Multivariable logistical regression analysis was performed to predict factors for failure, re-operation and adverse events. Results Baseline demographics were similar. Mean post-operative follow-up time was 24 months (USLS) and 18.5 months (SSLF). The difference in post-operative C point was not significant (USLS: median - 8 (IQR 2), SSLF: median - 7 cm (IQR 2)). Procedure success rates (post-operative C point < 0) were not different (USLS 90.2%, SSLF 92.5%). Re-operation rates for apical recurrence were similar between groups (SSLF 1.9%, USLS 6.6%). Univariate analysis for re-operation found that age, parity, and surgery type were not predictors of re-operation. The most common post-operative adverse event was urinary tract infection (USLS 10.2%, SSLF 10.5%). Conclusion Robot assisted/laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension and vaginal sacrospinous ligament fixation are safe and effective mesh-free techniques for management of apical pelvic organ prolapse based on objective improvements in POP-Q score and patient-reported outcome measures.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Comparison of complications and prolapse recurrence between laparoscopic and vaginal uterosacral ligament suspension for the treatment of vaginal prolapse
    Turner, Lindsay C.
    Lavelle, Erin S.
    Shepherd, Jonathan P.
    INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL, 2016, 27 (05) : 797 - 803
  • [22] Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Prolapse Hysterectomy with Apical Fixation: A Retrospective Comparison over an 18 Year Period
    Carlin, Greta Lisa
    Lange, Soeren
    Ziegler, Christina
    Heinzl, Florian
    Bodner-Adler, Barbara
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2023, 12 (06)
  • [23] Sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: observational follow-up of a multicentre randomised trial
    Schulten, Sascha F. M.
    Detollenaere, Renee J.
    Stekelenburg, Jelle
    IntHout, Joanna
    Kluivers, Kirsten B.
    van Eijndhoven, Hugo W. F.
    BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2019, 366
  • [24] Transvaginal uterosacral ligament hysteropexy versus hysterectomy plus uterosacral ligament suspension: a matched cohort study
    Milani, Rodolfo
    Manodoro, Stefano
    Cola, Alice
    Bellante, Nicolo
    Palmieri, Stefania
    Frigerio, Matteo
    INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL, 2020, 31 (09) : 1867 - 1872
  • [25] Recurrent apical prolapse after high uterosacral ligament suspension - in a heterogenous cohort characterised by a high prevalence of previous pelvic operations
    Pedersen, Katrine Dahl
    Storkholm, Marie Hojriis
    Bek, Karl Moller
    Glavind-Kristensen, Marianne
    Greisen, Susanne
    BMC WOMENS HEALTH, 2019, 19 (1)
  • [26] Recurrent apical prolapse after high uterosacral ligament suspension – in a heterogenous cohort characterised by a high prevalence of previous pelvic operations
    Katrine Dahl Pedersen
    Marie Højriis Storkholm
    Karl Møller Bek
    Marianne Glavind-Kristensen
    Susanne Greisen
    BMC Women's Health, 19
  • [27] Outcomes of Manchester procedure combined with high uterosacral ligament suspension for uterine prolapse
    Wang, Qi
    Wu, Nengxiu
    Li, Ying
    Lin, Chaoqin
    Xu, Ying
    Chen, Xianjing
    JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY RESEARCH, 2023, 49 (04) : 1273 - 1282
  • [28] Vaginal Prolapse Recurrence After Uterosacral Ligament Suspension in Normal-Weight Compared With Overweight and Obese Women
    Edenfield, Autumn L.
    Amundsen, Cindy L.
    Weidner, Alison C.
    Wu, Jennifer M.
    George, Amy
    Siddiqui, Nazema Y.
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2013, 121 (03) : 554 - 559
  • [29] Case report: Transvaginal single-port extraperitoneal laparoscopic sacrospinous ligament fixation for apical prolapse: A single-center case series
    Liu, Ye
    Wang, Chao
    Wang, Xianjing
    Yan, Rongrong
    Chu, Lei
    Chen, Xinliang
    FRONTIERS IN SURGERY, 2023, 10
  • [30] Laparoscopic Versus Vaginal Uterosacral Ligament Suspension in Women With Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Literature
    Douligeris, Athanasios
    Kathopoulis, Nikolaos
    Zachariou, Eleftherios
    Mortaki, Anastasia
    Zacharakis, Dimitrios
    Kypriotis, Konstantinos
    Chatzipapas, Ioannis
    Protopapas, Athanasios
    JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE GYNECOLOGY, 2024, 31 (06) : 477 - 487