Uterine-preserving POP surgery

Correction of pelvic organ prolapse by laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh: A clinical series

OBJECTIVE

Illustrating the outcomes of laparoscopic lateral suspension by mesh for pelvic organ prolapse repair.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective observational study was conducted collecting medical records of 48 patients treated between May 2016 and April 2018 in two different centers in Italy. Pre- and post-operative clinical evaluations as well as patients' satisfaction scores were considered. Patients were followed for two years. Statistical analysis was determined using the chi-square test in intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses, while Kaplan-Meier curves were built for assessing the prolapse recurrence and the symptoms recurrence. The Steel-Dwass test for pairwise comparisons was used to compare median scores from the King's General Health Perception Questionnaire answers.

RESULTS

Regarding the anatomical result, the outcome was either optimal or satisfactory (PoP-Q ≤1) at 12 months in 92% of patients for anterior compartment, in 100% for apical compartment, and in 75% for posterior compartment (intention-to-treat). Kaplan-Meier curves depicted a repair of prolapse in 70% of cases, with better outcomes for the anterior and the apical compartment. Patient self-perception of health was over 80% at each follow-up evaluation.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic lateral suspension is a reasonable technique for treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Further studies are needed to prove such a technique versus alternative surgeries.

Long-term mesh erosion rate following abdominal robotic reconstructive pelvic floor surgery: a prospective study and overview of the literature

Introduction and hypothesis

The use of synthetic mesh in transvaginal pelvic floor surgery has been subject to debate internationally. Although mesh erosion appears to be less associated with an abdominal approach, the long-term outcome has not been studied intensively. This study was set up to determine the long-term mesh erosion rate following abdominal pelvic reconstructive surgery.

Methods

A prospective, observational cohort study was conducted in a tertiary care setting. All consecutive female patients who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and sacrocolporectopexy in 2011 and 2012 were included. Primary outcome was mesh erosion. Preoperative and postoperative evaluation (6 weeks, 1 year, 5 years) with a clinical examination and questionnaire regarding pelvic floor symptoms was performed. Mesh-related complications were assessed using a transparent vaginal speculum, proctoscopy, and digital vaginal and rectal examination. Kaplan–Meier estimates were calculated for mesh erosion. A review of the literature on mesh exposure after minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy was performed (≥12 months’ follow-up).

Results

Ninety-six of the 130 patients included (73.8%) were clinically examined. Median follow-up time was 48.1 months (range 36.0–62.1). Three mesh erosions were diagnosed (3.1%; Kaplan–Meier 4.9%, 95% confidence interval 0–11.0): one bladder erosion for which mesh resection and an omental patch interposition were performed, and two asymptomatic vaginal erosions (at 42.7 and 42.3 months) treated with estrogen cream in one. Additionally, 22 patients responded solely by questionnaire and/or telephone; none reported mesh-related complaints. The literature, mostly based on retrospective studies, described a median mesh erosion rate of 1.9% (range 0–13.3%).

Conclusions

The long-term rate of mesh erosion following an abdominally placed synthetic graft is low.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00192-019-03990-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

[Uterine preservation or not during prolapse surgery: Review of the literature]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of hysterectomy in case of genital prolapse on the anatomical and functional results, and on per and post operative complications compared with uterine preservation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a review of the Pubmed, Medline, Embase and Cochrane literature using the following terms and MeSH (Medical Subject Headings of the National Library of Medicine): uterine prolapse; genital prolapse; prolapse surgery; vaginal prolapse surgery; abdominal prolapse surgery; hysterectomy; hysteropexy; sacrocolpopexy; surgical meshes; complications; sexuality; neoplasia; urinary; incontinence; cancer.

RESULTS

Among the 168 abstracts studied, 63 publications were retained. Whatever performance of hysterectomy or not, anatomical and functional results were similar in abdominal surgery (sacrocolpopexy) (OR=2.21 [95% CI: 0.33-14.67]) or vaginal surgery (OR=1.07 [95% CI: 0.38-2.99]). There was no difference in terms of urinary symptoms or sexuality after surgery. Hysterectomy was associated to a higher morbidity (bleeding, prolonged operating time, longer hospital stay), to an increased risk of mesh exposure particularly in case of total hysterectomy (8.6%; 95% CI: 6.3-11).

CONCLUSION

In the absence of evidence of superiority in terms of anatomical and functional outcomes, with an increased rate of complications, concomitant hysterectomy with prolapse surgery should probably not be performed routinely.

Uterine-preserving pelvic organ prolapse surgery using the UPHOLD LITE vaginal support system: The outcomes of 291 patients

This article aims to evaluate the safety and outcome of women with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) treated by a minimally invasive bilateral sacrospinous hysteropexy (UPHOLD LITE Vaginal Support System, Boston Scientific) without concomittent anti-incontinence surgery.This retrospective study was conducted between 2014 and 2016. Evaluated items included surgical parameter and postoperative outcome.Three hundred thirteen women with POP were eligible and 22 were excluded because of history of either or more following situations, such as hysterectomy, mesh augmentation, previous anti-incontinence procedures, and radical pelvic surgery before. With a median follow-up of 26 months, surgery-related morbidity rate was 23.7% (69/291), including 1 with bladder injury (0.3%), 2 with hematoma (0.7%), 8 with urinary tract infection (2.8%), 48 with voiding dysfunction (16.5%) and 10 with mesh problems (3.4%). Among these morbidities, 12 patients (4.1%) needed surgical intervention, including 6 for mesh problems, 1 for bladder injury, 2 for hematoma, and 3 for anti-incontinence surgery. The difference of pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) stage before and after surgery showed a statistical significance (anterior portion from 1.36 ± 2.60 to -2.69 ± 0.26, posterior portion from -1.29 ± 2.08 to -2.46 ± 0.62, and cervix portion from 2.03 ± 4.80 to -6.98 ± 2.26, all P < .001). At the end of August 2018, re-intervention rate for POP recurrence was 2.1% (n = 6), including abdominal sacrocolpopexy (n = 1), anterior repair (n = 1), vaginal total hysterectomy and uterine-sacral ligament suspension (n = 1), vaginal total hysterectomy and LeFort (n = 1), LeFort (n = 1), and pessary support (n = 1).Because some women developed postoperative lower urinary tract symptom, preoperative evaluation, including careful and detailed history taking, and urodynamic evaluation is suggested. After adequate counseling, uterine-preserving sacrospinal ligament suspension by UPHOLD LITE Vaginal Support System surgery could be considered in the management of women with POP, because of its high successful rate (97.9%) and low morbidity rate.

Comparisons of Functional Apical Support After Sacral Hysteropexy Versus Sacral Colpopexy: A Cadaveric Study

OBJECTIVES

Prolapse procedures with uterine preservation offer an alternative to colpopexy with hysterectomy. Few studies have examined the differences in anatomic or subjective outcomes following sacral hysteropexy versus sacral colpopexy with hysterectomy. This study sought to compare the ability of sacral hysteropexy and sacral colpopexy with hysterectomy to resist downward traction as an estimate of apical support in human cadavers.

METHODS

Sacral hysteropexy was performed on unembalmed female cadavers. A metal bolt/washer was threaded through the uterine fundus, down the cervical canal. and out the vagina and fastened to a waxed surgical filament, which ran over a fixed pulley at the table's end. Successive weights were added to provide increasing loads on the uterine fundus, and the distances traversed by the fundus were recorded. The same process was repeated after completion of a total hysterectomy (with vaginal cuff closure) and subsequent sacral colpopexy in the same specimen. Data were analyzed using paired-sample t test and repeated-measures analysis of variance (Sigma Plot version 13.0), with P ≤ 0.05 considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Eight female cadavers were utilized. With the addition of each weight, the average distance traversed by the uterine fundus or vaginal cuff gradually increased. There were no statistical differences in the distances moved by the apex between sacral hysteropexy and total hysterectomy/sacral colpopexy.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that functional support provided by sacral hysteropexy and sacral colpopexy with hysterectomy may be similar. Further studies are needed to correlate these findings with patient satisfaction, which may vary despite similar anatomic results.

Pelvic Pain and Apical Prolapse Surgery: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to evaluate the association of preoperative pelvic pain with operative characteristics and the association of patient and operative characteristics with postoperative pain.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study utilizing Clinformatics DataMart, a large national commercial insurance database. We collected data for patients older than 18 years who underwent apical prolapse surgery between January 2005 and December 2014. We stratified data by preoperative (prior) pain and analyzed for associations of prior and postoperative pain. Logistic regression analysis was performed using SAS software.

RESULTS

A total of 14,440 patients met inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Patients with prior pain were more likely to have an abdominal (open or laparoscopic) approach, a concomitant hysterectomy, but less likely to have additional repairs or a mesh insertion (P < 0.001). Postoperative pain was less with a concomitant hysterectomy, whether they had prior pain (odds ratio [OR], 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.77) or not (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.82). Additional vaginal repairs were associated with more postoperative pain for those without prior pain (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.3-2.04). Age older than 45 years was associated with less pain. Length of hospital stay of more than 2 days was associated with more pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with prior pain were more likely to undergo an abdominal approach and have a concomitant hysterectomy. Postoperative pain was less with a concomitant hysterectomy, but more with additional vaginal repairs. There is a need to include pain as an outcome in future studies, particularly clinical trials.

Laparoscopic hysterosacropexy in case of total uterus prolapse - case report

INTRODUCTION

Due to the many advances in laparoscopic surgery in urogynecology, various uterus-preserving techniques are increasingly being used in treatment. The following is a report of the case of a 43-year-old female with uterine prolapse POP-Q 4. This patient successfully underwent a minimally invasive laparoscopic procedure while preserving the uterus.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A 43-year-old caucasian female who was suffering from prolapse of the uterus POP-Q 4, overflow incontinence, dysuria and urinary retention was admitted to our department for the purpose of diagnostic tests and operative treatment. A gynecological examination showed a protruded hernial sac with the complete, normal sized uterus which had a thick appearance. The hernial sac also contained parts of the urinary bladder and intestines. Pelvic organ prolapse was classified as follows: prolapse of the uterus POP-Q 4. After repositioning the uterus with Kristeller specula we found a cystocele POP-Q 1 and a rectocele POP-Q 1. We also discovered a defect in the perineal region. Considering the patient's age and ASA Score 1, minimally invasive treatment was proposed: laparoscopic hysterosacropexy with perineoplasty.

DISCUSSION

Transabdominal sacrocolpopexy is associated with a low recurrence rate and also lower rates of dyspareunia when compared with vaginal sacrospinal colpopexy. Both sacrocolpopexy and implantation of anterior vaginal polypropylene mesh have better success rates and a lower rate of reoperation than vaginal uterosacral suspension. In level I defects, the right approach seems to be sacropexy. In this technique, the sacrouterine ligament is restored by recreating a ligament with polypropylene mesh.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy seems to be a good alternative in the treatment of uterus prolapse. It can also be viewed as a possible alternative for apical defect POP Q III or IV.

Uterine preservation vs hysterectomy in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis and clinical practice guidelines

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to systematically review the literature on apical pelvic organ prolapse surgery with uterine preservation compared with prolapse surgeries including hysterectomy and provide evidence-based guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

The sources for our data were MEDLINE, Cochrane, and clinicaltrials.gov databases from inception to January 2017.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We accepted randomized and nonrandomized studies of uterine-preserving prolapse surgeries compared with those involving hysterectomy.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

Studies were extracted for participant information, intervention, comparator, efficacy outcomes, and adverse events, and they were individually and collectively assessed for methodological quality. If 3 or more studies compared the same surgeries and reported the same outcome, a meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

We screened 4467 abstracts and identified 94 eligible studies, 53 comparing uterine preservation to hysterectomy in prolapse surgery. Evidence was of moderate quality overall. Compared with hysterectomy plus mesh sacrocolpopexy, uterine preservation with sacrohysteropexy reduces mesh exposure, operative time, blood loss, and surgical cost without differences in prolapse recurrence. Compared with vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral suspension, uterine preservation in the form of laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy improves the C point and vaginal length on the pelvic organ prolapse quantification exam, estimated blood loss, postoperative pain and functioning, and hospital stay, but open abdominal sacrohysteropexy worsens bothersome urinary symptoms, operative time, and quality of life. Transvaginal mesh hysteropexy (vs with hysterectomy) decreases mesh exposure, reoperation for mesh exposure, postoperative bleeding, and estimated blood loss and improves posterior pelvic organ prolapse quantification measurement. Transvaginal uterosacral or sacrospinous hysteropexy or the Manchester procedure compared with vaginal hysterectomy with native tissue suspension both showed improved operative time and estimated blood loss and no worsening of prolapse outcomes with uterine preservation. However, there is a significant lack of data on prolapse outcomes >3 years after surgery, the role of uterine preservation in obliterative procedures, and longer-term risk of uterine pathology after uterine preservation.

CONCLUSION

Uterine-preserving prolapse surgeries improve operating time, blood loss, and risk of mesh exposure compared with similar surgical routes with concomitant hysterectomy and do not significantly change short-term prolapse outcomes. Surgeons may offer uterine preservation as an option to appropriate women who desire this choice during apical prolapse repair.

Anatomical outcomes 1 year after pelvic organ prolapse surgery in patients with and without a uterus at a high risk of recurrence: a randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy/cervicopexy and anterior vaginal mesh

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Few studies have compared the different approaches of mesh surgery in patients with severe pelvic organ prolapse (POP). In addition to laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy/cervicopexy (LSC-Cx), anterior vaginal mesh (AVM) may be an effective approach for correcting anterior vaginal wall associated with apical POP in women with advanced POP.

METHODS

A randomised controlled trial (RCT; January 2011 to March 2016) including 120 patients (60/group) with advanced symptomatic POP, with a predominant anterior vaginal wall descent stage III or greater in combination with a stage II or III apical defect (uterus or vaginal vault). Patients underwent four visits: baseline, 3, 6 and12 months after surgery. The main outcome was anatomical success defined as anterior and posterior vaginal wall not descending beyond the hymen and vaginal apex descent no more than one third into the vagina. Secondary variables: PFDI, ICIQ-UI-SF, intraoperative variables, postoperative morbidity and complications.

RESULTS

Anatomical success was achieved with LSC-Cx in 79% and with AVM in 76% (NS). No statistically significant differences were found among POP-Q anterior vaginal wall points between groups, whereas better results were obtained with LSC-Cx in posterior vaginal wall points and total vaginal length. Intraoperative outcomes were similar in the two groups, except for operating time (78.05 min LSC-Cx vs 44.28 min AVM). There were no statistically significant differences related to de novo stress urinary incontinence and dyspareunia. Worse results were found in the CRADI-8 in the LSC-Cx group, owing to constipation. Late postoperative complications and reinterventions were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

No differences were found in the anatomical correction of anterior and apical POP. The LSC-Cx group presented better correction of posterior vaginal wall defects and a longer total vaginal length.

Uterus preservation is superior to hysterectomy when performing laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh

Introduction and hypothesis

We aimed to compare differences between laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh (LLS) performed with supracervical hysterectomy (LLSHE) and without hysterectomy (LLSUP).

Methods

We retrospectively collected data from women operated by a single surgeon between 2003 and 2011. From a total of 339 women with symptomatic anterior and/or apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and an intact uterus, 224 had LLSUP (70.4%) and 94 had LLSHE (29.6%). Three hundred and sixteen patients were examined at 1 year. Primary outcomes were objective and subjective success at 1 year during clinical evaluation. Secondary outcomes were complications (Clavien-Dindo scale) and mesh exposure. Patient satisfaction was evaluated by telephone interview using a 10-point scale and the Patient Global Impression of Improvement Scale (PGI-I).

Results

LLSUP and LLSHE did not differ for age (mean 57 and 55 years, respectively), preoperative status, complications, and participation at the interview (52 vs 53%). LLSHE is associated with higher mesh exposure (6.5 vs 1.3%, p = 0.014) and more frequent use of Mersilene. Titanium-coated and noncoated polypropylene was more frequently used in LLSUP. At 1 year, both anatomic success rate for the anterior compartment (98.7 vs 94.6%, p = 0.021) and subjective success rate (83.5 vs 72.8%, p = 0.035) were higher for LLSUP. Without hysterectomy, patients more often improved (90.5 vs 76.5%, p = 0.013) and would more frequently recommend the procedure (94.5 vs 80.4%, p = 0.004).

Conclusions

LLS with or without hysterectomy is a safe technique with high patient satisfaction. The uterus-preserving approach appears to result in better anatomic outcome for the anterior compartment, better subjective outcome, and higher patient satisfaction.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00192-018-3678-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Comparison of UpholdTM Vaginal Mesh Procedure with Hysterectomy or Uterine Preservation for the Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Hysterectomy is the empirical treatment for female pelvic organ prolapse (POP) without robust evidence to prove its efficacy. Uphold transvaginal mesh (TVM) system is an innovated device with smaller area, superior anterior/apical support with single incision to treat POP. The prospective cohort study aims to evaluate Uphold TVM's performance with or without concomitant hysterectomy. Inclusion criteria specify patients suffering from stage 2 or more anterior/apical prolapse without previous hysterectomy. Exclusion criteria specify those with contraindications to uterine preservation, such as leiomyomas, adenomyosis, endometrial hyperplasia, abnormal uterine bleeding, postmenopausal bleeding, cervical dysplasia, receiving tamoxifen treatment, family history of gynecology cancer, or colon cancer and incapability to be routinely followed. Thirty patients are recruited in the hysterectomy group and 66 patients in the hysteropexy group. The results demonstrate that patients with Uphold mesh only experience longer vaginal length, shorter operation duration, less blood loss and less post-operation pain. The performance in anatomical correction, lower urinary tract symptoms improvement, de novo dyspareunia, urodynamic study parameters and mesh extrusion rates are comparable with or without uterus preservation. The information is useful in pre-operation counseling, when the patient can make an educated choice whether or not to receive concomitant hysterectomy.

Laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension with uterine preservation for pelvic organ prolapse: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To introduce an alternative surgical technique of laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension (LILS) with uterine preservation and evaluate its efficacy and safety for patients with severe pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

METHODS

Between June 2014 and December 2015, 35 patients with symptomatic stage III or IV were treated by LILS with uterine preservation. The perioperative parameters including surgical time, blood loss, hospital stay and complications were recorded. The anatomical cure rate was evaluated according to the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Questionnaire (POP-Q) assessment. The anatomical points were analyzed by dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). Validated questionnaire of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20), the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) and the Pelvic organ prolapse urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12) were recorded to evaluate the symptom severity, quality of life and sexual activity.

RESULTS

The mean surgical time was 163.8 ± 42.3 min (range: 120-280 min), the mean estimated blood loss was 48.6 ± 60.5 ml (range: 10-200 ml), and the mean hospital stay was 5 days (range: 3-7 days). No intra-operative complications were encountered. The anatomical success rate at postoperative 6-month and 12-month was 97.1% and 94.3%, respectively. The postoperative anatomical points on straining showed a significant improvement on dynamic MRI as compared to baselines. The symptom severity, quality of life and sexual activity also presented significant improvement both 6-month and 12-month after surgery. After a minimal 12 months follow-up, no postoperative complications occurred and the recurrence prolapse were low.

CONCLUSION

LILS with uterine preservation is a feasible, effective and safe surgical alternative in the treatment of POP for patients who desire to reserve uterus. Longer follow-up data from larger studies are required to confirm the benefits of LILS with uterine preservation as a minimally invasive surgical approach.

Does the uterus need to be removed to correct uterovaginal prolapse?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Owing to growing interest in uterine preservation, this evidence-based review compares hysteropexy with hysterectomy during surgery for uterovaginal prolapse.

RECENT FINDINGS

LeFort colpocleisis is preferred over vaginal hysterectomy and total colpocleisis. The majority of studies show no differences in outcomes comparing sacrospinous hysteropexy with vaginal hysterectomy native tissue prolapse repair except for a single randomized controlled trial showing increased apical recurrences with advanced prolapse. Results comparing uterosacral hysteropexy and sacral hysteropexy with hysterectomy native tissue repairs are inconclusive. Potentially better outcomes are reported when laparoscopic hysterectomy (total or supracervical) is performed with sacral colpopexy compared with laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy, but mesh and morcellation risks should be considered. Data comparing vaginal mesh hysteropexy with currently available products with hysterectomy prolapse repairs are lacking but a high-quality study is underway.

SUMMARY

High satisfaction and low reoperation rates can be accomplished using a variety of hysteropexy techniques. The advantages and disadvantages of uterine conservation must be considered when planning uterovaginal prolapse surgery. The type of hysteropexy and possible graft configuration may impact reoperation rates for recurrent prolapse. Vaginal mesh risks must be considered and laparoscopic mesh risks must be balanced with potential difficulty of future hysterectomy if needed.

Long-term experience with a novel uterine-sparing transvaginal mesh procedure for uterovaginal prolapse

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate outcomes and quality of life in patients operated transvaginally with an original mesh shape for uterus-sparing prolapse surgery and to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the technique.

STUDY DESIGN

We prospectively evaluated 66 postmenopausal patients (POP-Q Stage III: 32, IV: 34) operated between May 2008 and December 2013. We used wide weave polypropylene monofilament mesh that functions as a hammock anchored posteriorly to sacrospinous ligaments, its anterior wings exit the pelvis through the obturatory membrane. Follow-up was scheduled at 3-, 12- months and in May 2016. Prolapse-Quality of Life Questionnaire (P-QoL) was administered preoperatively, at 12 months and in May 2016. The chi square and Wilcoxon test were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 5.6 (SD: 1.6, Range: 1.1-8.1) years. The overall success rate (POP-Q ≤ 2) was 92.5% at 12 months and 84.4% at May 2016, these data remained stable over time (p > 0.05). Early complications occurred in 2 (3%) patients, late in 5 (7.8%) of which mesh extrusion in 4 (6.3%). Data from P-QoL showed significant improvement between preoperative and postoperative data (P < 0.01 for all domains) and they remained stable with time (p > 0.05). De-novo dyspareunia was 17.6% at 12 months and 10.3% at May 2016.

CONCLUSIONS

The low rate and grade of complications demonstrates the safety of the procedure, which offers stable anatomical correction with significant improvement in QoL.

Transposition of Cardinal Ligaments for Stages II-III Uterine Prolapse: A Minimally Invasive Procedure

Uterine and other pelvic organ prolapse (POP) are becoming more frequently encountered due to increased life expectancy among menopausal women. Traditionally, most surgical procedures included hysterectomy as an integral part of the management. POP might, however, though less commonly, affect women not willing to accept hysterectomy, especially young females who did not complete their family. For these patients, uterine prolapse could be managed by a number of uterine-sparing surgical procedures that are performed through either abdominal or vaginal route according to patient's condition, surgeon's choice, and skills. Most of these operations, however, are usually lengthy, invasive, need good experience, and sometimes special accessories and instruments. We performed anterior transposition of the cardinal ligaments on two patients with POP quantification Stages II-III uterine prolapse without amputating the cervix. Both patients were interviewed at 6, 12, and 18-month intervals and reported no undue pain or dyspareunia with complete satisfaction regarding self-assessment of gynecologic anatomy. Furthermore, examination by the lead author revealed satisfactory anatomic correction. We recommend this simple, easy, and minimally invasive vaginal procedure to fellow gynecologists for repair of mild degrees of uterine prolapse in women declining hysterectomy or amputation of the cervix.

Dutch women's attitudes towards hysterectomy and uterus preservation in surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse

OBJECTIVE

To investigate Dutch women's attitudes and preferences towards hysterectomy or uterus preservation in surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.

STUDY DESIGN

Women's attitude was assessed by a structured questionnaire in one university hospital and one non-university teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Between December 2013 and November 2014, 102 women referred with prolapse complaints, without previous prolapse surgery, responded to the questionnaire received by mail prior to gynaecological consultation. Main outcome was the preference for uterus preserving surgery versus hysterectomy. Furthermore we studied the impact of uterus preservation and hysterectomy on body image and sexual function and the importance of treatment success, risk of urinary incontinence after surgery, complication risk, recovery time, length of hospital stay, costs and the risk of developing endometrial cancer.

RESULTS

Assuming that functional and anatomical outcomes after hysterectomy and uterus preserving surgery were equal, more women expressed preference for uterus preservation (43%, 44 out of 102 women) compared to hysterectomy (27%, 27 out of 102 women). The majority of women expected a similar improvement in sexuality and body image after the two treatment modalities. Treatment success, risk for urinary incontinence after surgery and complication risk were the most important factors. Taken the future risk of endometrial cancer into account, 18% of the women preferred hysterectomy because of this risk.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that women referred with prolapse complaints have a preference for uterus preservation in case outcomes after both interventions are expected to be equal. The majority of women expected that body image and sexual function would equally improve after both interventions.

Uterine preservation for advanced pelvic organ prolapse repair: Anatomical results and patient satisfaction

OBJECTIVE

The aims of the current study were to evaluate outcomes and patient satisfaction in cases of uterine prolapse treated with vaginal mesh, while preserving the uterus.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study that included all patients operated for prolapse repair with trocar-less vaginal mesh while preserving the uterus between October 2010 and March 2013. Data included: patients pre-and post-operative symptoms, POP-Q and operative complications. Success was defined as prolapse < than stage 2. A telephone survey questionnaire was used to evaluate patient's satisfaction.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients with pelvic organ prolapse stage 3, including uterine prolapse of at least stage 2 (mean point C at+1.4 (range+8-(-1)) were included. Mean follow-up was 22 months. Success rate of the vaginal mesh procedure aimed to repair uterine prolapse was 92% (61/66), with mean point C at -6.7 (range (-1) - (-9)). No major intra-or post-operative complication occurred. A telephone survey questionnaire was conducted post-operatively 28 months on average. Ninety-eight percent of women were satisfied with the decision to preserve their uterus. Eighteen patients (34%) received prior consultation elsewhere for hysterectomy due to their prolapse, and decided to have the operation at our center in order to preserve the uterus.

CONCLUSIONS

Uterine preservation with vaginal mesh was found to be a safe and effective treatment, even in cases with advanced uterine prolapse. Most patients prefer to keep their uterus. Uterus preservation options should be discussed with every patient before surgery for pelvic organ prolapse.

Minimally invasive surgery in pelvic floor repair

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the use and efficacy of minimally invasive surgery in pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair. This review summarizes surgical options for management of POP with special emphasis on minimally invasive surgical approach and discusses the recent experience and feasibility of integrating robot-assisted technology.

RECENT FINDINGS

Minimally invasive approaches have equal efficacy and less morbidity than laparotomy for POP repair, particularly apical prolapse. Robotics may facilitate the rate of minimally invasive surgery for POP repair with greater cost and as yet no proven superiority for conventional laparoscopy.

SUMMARY

Minimally invasive surgery is the preferred approach to POP repair. Conventional laparoscopic or robotic sacral colpopexy is recommended for apical defect and procidentia.

Surgical Updates in the Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Pelvic organ prolapse affects approximately 8% of women, and the demand for pelvic organ prolapse surgery is expected to increase by nearly 50% over the next 40 years. The surgical techniques used to correct pelvic organ prolapse have evolved over the last 10 years, with multiple well-designed studies addressing the risks, outcomes, reoperation rates, and optimal surgical approaches. Here we review the most recent evidence on the route of access, concomitant procedures, and synthetic materials for augmenting the repair. Ultimately, this review highlights that there is no optimal method for correcting pelvic organ prolapse and that the risks, benefits, and approaches should be discussed in a patient-centered, goal-oriented approach to decision-making.

Patient satisfaction after laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh for pelvic organ prolapse: outcome report of a continuous series of 417 patients

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Sacropexy is considered the gold standard for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) although dissection of the promontory may be challenging, particularly in obese women. Laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh (LLS) could be an alternative.

METHODS

LLS provides lateral attachment by fibrosis of a vesicovaginal mesh. Clinical evaluation was performed at 1 year using the simplified POP quantification system (POP-Q). Primary outcomes were objective and subjective cure at 1 year. After a mean of 7.2 years the rates of reoperation and complications were assessed as secondary outcomes. Patient satisfaction was evaluated by telephone interview using a ten-point-scale and the PGI-I scale. Factors predicting satisfaction were determined by logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 417 patients were treated between 2003 and 2011. At 1 year 78.4% of patients were asymptomatic and anatomic success rates were 91.6% for the anterior compartment, 93.6% for the apical compartment and 85.3% for the posterior compartment. The complication rate of Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher was 2.2%. The mesh exposure rate was 4.3% and the reoperation rate was 7.3%. Of the 417 patients, 214 participated in the telephone interview. Over 85% rated their situation as improved and satisfaction was associated with the absence of concomitant hysterectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

LLS is a safe technique with promising results in terms of a composite outcome, low complication rates and high long-term patient satisfaction. However, a randomized controlled trial is needed to establish the technique as an alternative to sacropexy in the treatment of POP in obese and high morbidity patients.

Surgical Outcomes and Safety of Robotic Sacrocolpopexy in Women With Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Purpose

This study aimed to investigate the surgical outcomes and safety of robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) in patients with uterine/vaginal vault prolapse.

Methods

Between January 2009 and June 2015, 16 women with apical prolapse underwent RSC. Pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) examination was performed, and treatment success was defined as the presence of grade 0 or I apical prolapse upon POP-Q examination at the final follow-up. Pelvic floor distress inventory-short form 20 (PFDI-SF 20) was administered at every follow-up. A treatment satisfaction questionnaire was administered by telephone to evaluate patient satisfaction with the operation.

Results

Median age was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 56–68 years), and follow-up duration was 25.3 months (IQR, 5.4–34.0 months). Thirteen women (81.3%) had ≥grade III apical prolapse. Operation time was 251 minutes (IQR, 236–288 minutes), and blood loss was 75 mL (IQR, 50–150 mL). Median hospital stay was 4 days (IQR, 3–5 days). At the final follow-up, treatment success was reported in all patients, who presented grade 0 (n=8, 57.1%) and grade I (n=6, 42.9%) apical prolapse. Dramatic improvements in PFDI-SF 20 scores were noted after RSC (from 39 to 4; P=0.001). Most patients (12 of 13) were satisfied with RSC. An intraoperative complication (sacral venous plexus injury) was reported in 1 patient, and there was no conversion to open surgery. Mesh erosion was not reported.

Conclusions

RSC is an efficient and safe surgical option for apical prolapse repair. Most patients were satisfied with RSC. Thus, RSC might be one of the best treatment options for apical prolapse in women.

Hysteropexy: Evidence and Insights

Uterovaginal prolapse may be treated with or without concomitant hysterectomy. Many patients express interest in uterine-sparing prolapse procedures, for which there are increasing evidence available regarding techniques and outcomes. Uterine-sparing procedures to treat uterovaginal prolapse require a unique set of surgical considerations including uterine abnormalities, possibility of occult malignancy, and future pregnancy. Data, including randomized controlled trials, support the use of sacrospinous hysteropexy. Other prospective trials detailing outcomes following uterosacral hysteropexy, mesh augmented sacrospinous hysteropexy, and sacrohysteropexy are also encouraging.

Sacrospinous hysteropexy: review and meta-analysis of outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Sacrospinous hysteropexy is a uterine-preserving procedure for treatment of apical prolapse. We present a literature review evaluating the sacrospinous hysteropexy procedure and its current place in the surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse. Additionally, to assess the efficacy of the procedure, we performed a meta-analysis of studies comparing sacrospinous hysteropexy to vaginal hysterectomy and repair in terms of anatomical outcomes, complications, and repeat surgery.

METHODS

Major literature databases including MEDLINE (1946 to 2 April 2016), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 3), and Embase (1947 to 2 April 2016) were searched for relevant studies. We used Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager software to perform meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies and observational studies.

RESULTS

Vaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy was first performed in 1989 and is similar in technique to sacrospinous colpopexy. Two randomized controlled trials and four cohort studies (n = 651) were included in the meta-analysis. Apical failure rates after sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy were not significantly different, although the trend favored vaginal hysterectomy [odds ratio (OR) 2.08; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-5.68]. Rates of repeat surgery for prolapse were not significantly different between the two groups (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.41-2.37). The most significant disadvantage of uterine-preservation prolapse surgery when compared with hysterectomy is the lack of prevention and diagnosis of uterine malignancy.

CONCLUSION

Sacrospinous hysteropexy is a safe and effective procedure for pelvic organ prolapse and has comparable outcomes to vaginal hysterectomy with repair.

Role of concurrent vaginal hysterectomy in the outcomes of mesh-based vaginal pelvic organ prolapse surgery

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Hysterectomy is often performed at the time of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery; yet, there is insufficient evidence regarding the specific effect of hysterectomy on outcomes. We sought to determine the outcomes and associated short-term complications of mesh-based POP surgery with and without concurrent hysterectomy.

METHODS

We utilized the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperation System (SPARCS) database to identify patients under 55 years of age undergoing surgeries for POP with mesh between 2009 and 2014. Patients who had a hysterectomy at the time of mesh-based POP surgery were compared with those who underwent mesh-based POP surgery without hysterectomy. Outcome measures of the patient groups before and after propensity score matching were compared. We assessed the difference Chi-squared tests and log-rank tests in the entire cohort and Mantel-Haenszel stratified Chi-squared tests and Prentice-Wilcoxon tests in the matched cohort.

RESULTS

A total of 1,601 women underwent mesh-based POP surgery. 921 patients underwent concurrent hysterectomy, whereas 680 had mesh-based uterine-preserving POP surgery. After propensity score matching, there was no difference in reintervention rates between groups for up to 3 years. Concurrent hysterectomy with mesh-based POP repair was consistently associated with longer hospitalization (20.0% vs 12.8% stayed longer than 2 days) and higher charges (median charges were $22,689 vs $19,273).

CONCLUSIONS

Concurrent hysterectomy during mesh-based POP surgery in patients under 55 years led to more expensive charges and a longer stay compared with uterine-preserving mesh surgery. There was no difference in reintervention rates between groups for up to 3 years.

Vaginal and laparoscopic mesh hysteropexy for uterovaginal prolapse: a parallel cohort study

BACKGROUND

There is growing interest in uterine conservation at the time of surgery for uterovaginal prolapse, but limited data compare different types of hysteropexy.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare 1-year efficacy and safety of laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy and vaginal mesh hysteropexy.

STUDY DESIGN

This multicenter, prospective parallel cohort study compared laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy to vaginal mesh hysteropexy at 8 institutions. We included women ages 35-80 years who desired uterine conservation, were done with childbearing, and were undergoing 1 of the above procedures for stage 2-4 symptomatic anterior/apical uterovaginal prolapse (anterior descent at or beyond the hymen [Aa or Ba ≥ 0] and apical descent at or below the midvagina [C ≥ -TVL/2]). We excluded women with cervical elongation, prior mesh prolapse repair, cervical dysplasia, chronic pelvic pain, uterine abnormalities, and abnormal bleeding. Cure was defined as no prolapse beyond the hymen and cervix above midvagina (anatomic), no vaginal bulge sensation (symptomatic), and no reoperations. Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification examination and validated questionnaires were collected at baseline and 12 months including the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Short Form, Female Sexual Function Index, and Patient Global Impression of Improvement. In all, 72 subjects/group were required to detect 94% vs 75% cure (80% power, 15% dropout). Intention-to-treat analysis was used with logistic regression adjusting for baseline differences.

RESULTS

We performed 74 laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy and 76 vaginal mesh hysteropexy procedures from July 2011 through May 2014. Laparoscopic patients were younger (P < .001), had lower parity (P = .006), were more likely premenopausal (P = .008), and had more severe prolapse (P = .02). Laparoscopic procedure (174 vs 64 minutes, P < .0001) and total operating time (239 vs 112 minutes, P < .0001) were longer. There were no differences in blood loss, complications, and hospital stay. One-year outcomes for the available 83% laparoscopic and 80% vaginal hysteropexy patients revealed no differences in anatomic (77% vs 80%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.48; P = .20), symptomatic (90% vs 95%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.40; P = .22), or composite (72% vs 74%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.58; P = .27) cure. Mesh exposures occurred in 2.7% laparoscopic vs 6.6% vaginal hysteropexy (P = .44). A total of 95% of each group were very much better or much better. Pelvic floor symptom and sexual function scores improved for both groups with no difference between groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy and vaginal mesh hysteropexy had similar 1-year cure rates and high satisfaction.

Long-term functional outcomes following mesh-augmented posterior vaginal prolapse repair

OBJECTIVE

To assess long-term patient-centered functional outcomes following posterior vaginal wall repair using mesh implants.

METHOD

The present prospective telephone interview study enrolled a cohort of women who had undergone posterior vaginal wall repair with mesh between January 1, 2006 and February 28, 2009, at a single center in Israel. Patients were asked to report long-term outcomes, and demographic, clinical, intraoperative, and postoperative follow-up data were retrieved from patients' medical files. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to asses associations between baseline characteristics and long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

In total, 102 patients were contacted, with 80 (78.4%) at 61-83months after surgery agreeing to participate. A recurrence of prolapse symptoms was reported by 14 patients (18%) (12 required a corrective procedure), mesh had been removed from two patients owing to erosion/extrusion, and two others had undergone removal of granulation tissue. Long-term, bothersome symptoms were reported by 13 (16%) patients. Parity and previous hysterectomy were associated with lower odds of long-term adverse outcomes, and the location of the apical (C/D) pelvic organ prolapse quantification point and a change in its position following surgery were associated with increased odds of adverse outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The long-term adverse-outcome rate was low for patients who underwent posterior vaginal mesh augmentation. These results highlight the importance of apical support for good long-term functional outcomes.

Sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: evidence-based review and recommendations

Sacrocolpopexy is considered a reference operation for pelvic organ prolapse repair but its indications and technical aspects are not standardized. A faculty of urogynecology surgeons critically evaluated the peer-reviewed literature published until September 2015 aiming to produce evidence-based recommendations. PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials published in English language. The modified Oxford data grading system was used to access quality of evidence and grade recommendations. The Delphi process was implemented when no data was available. Thirteen randomized, controlled trials were identified, that provided levels 1 to 3 of evidence on various aspects of sacrocolpopexy. Sacrocolpopexy is the preferred procedure for vaginal apical prolapse (Grade A), monofilament polypropylene mesh is the graft of choice and the laparoscopic approach is the preferred technique (Grade B). Grade B recommendation supports the performance of concomitant procedures at the time of sacrocolpopexy. Grade C recommendation suggests either permanent or delayed sutures for securing the mesh to the vagina, permanent tackers or sutures for securing the mesh to the sacral promontory and closing the peritoneum over the mesh. A Delphi process Grade C recommendation supports proceeding with sacrocolpopexy after uncomplicated, intraoperative bladder or small bowel injuries. There is insufficient or conflicting data on hysterectomy (total or subtotal) or uterus preservation during sacrocolpopexy (Grade D). Sacrocolpopexy remains an excellent option for vaginal apical prolapse repair. The issue of uterine preservation or excision during the procedure requires further clarification. Variations exist in the performance of most technical aspects of the procedure.

The Design of a Randomized Trial of Vaginal Surgery for Uterovaginal Prolapse: Vaginal Hysterectomy With Native Tissue Vault Suspension Versus Mesh Hysteropexy Suspension (The Study of Uterine Prolapse Procedures Randomized Trial)

OBJECTIVES

We present the rationale for and design of a randomized controlled superiority trial comparing 2 vaginal surgical approaches for the treatment of uterovaginal prolapse. The Study of Uterine Prolapse Procedures Randomized Trial (SUPeR) trial compares the efficacy and safety of native tissue repair with vaginal hysterectomy and suture apical suspension versus uterine conservation with mesh hysteropexy through 36 to 60 months postoperatively for primary repair of uterovaginal prolapse.

METHODS

The selection of the primary outcome measure, timing of randomization, patient and evaluator masking to surgical intervention, collection and adjudication of adverse events, cost effectiveness evaluations, partnering with industry, and surgeon certification of competency to perform the 2 procedures is described. A composite primary outcome of success defined as no prolapse symptoms, no objective prolapse beyond the hymen, and no retreatment of prolapse, with a minimum of 36 months postsurgery follow-up using survival analyses is planned. Secondary outcomes measured at baseline and every 6 months postsurgery include validated condition-specific and general quality of life assessments, global impression of improvement, body image, and sexual function measures. Unique challenges during the trial design include maintenance of patient masking to the intervention with routine gynecologic health maintenance and maintenance of evaluator masking.

RESULTS

Recruitment and randomization of 180 participants is complete, and participants are currently in the follow-up phase.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial will provide information to help surgeons counsel patients and contribute evidence-based information regarding risks and benefits of 2 approaches for the treatment of uterovaginal prolapse.