Bilateral Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Bilateral Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation With Vaginal Hysterectomy for Apical Uterovaginal Prolapse

Purpose: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the anatomical and functional outcomes between bilateral sacro-spinous hysteropexy (BSHP) and bilateral sacrospinous ligament fixation with vaginal hysterectomy (BSLF/VH) in women with apical-predominant uterovaginal prolapse.Methods: Clinical data from patients with symptomatic Pelvic Organ Prolapse-Quantification (POP-Q) stage 2 or higher uterovaginal prolapse who underwent either BSHP (48 patients) or BSLF/VH (69 patients) between January 2014 and Decem-ber 2018 were reviewed retrospectively. The primary outcome was the subjective satisfaction rate evaluated by Patient Global Impression of Improvement, and the secondary outcomes included objective anatomical success rates, impact on disease -spe-cific quality of life evaluated by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire-12, Pelvic Floor Dis-tress Inventory-Short Form 20, and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire 7, and surgical complications.Results: After a median follow-up of 35 months (range, 25-58 months), all patients in both groups demonstrated significant postoperative improvements in anatomical and functional outcomes (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in post-operative subjective and objective results, sexual satisfaction outcomes, or disease-specific quality of life between the BSHP and BSLF/VH groups, and similar incidence rates of intraoperative and postoperative complications were also recorded.Conclusions: The uterus-sparing BSHP procedure yielded noninferior anatomical and functional outcomes compared to the BSLF/VH procedure and could be adopted as an alternative to conventional hysterectomy-based native-tissue repair modali-ties for symptomatic apical-predominant uterovaginal prolapse.