J Menopausal Med.  2017 Dec;23(3):190-195. 10.6118/jmm.2017.23.3.190.

A Study on Laparoscopic Sacral Colpopexy for Uterine Prolapse

• Cho EA
• Um MJ
• Kim SJ
• Jung H

• KMID: 2400255
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.6118/jmm.2017.23.3.190

Abstract

OBJECTIVES
We sought to describe the perioperative and postoperative adverse events associated with sacral colpopexy and evaluate the surgical outcome, complications, and benefits of laparoscopic sacral fixation for patients with pelvic prolapse.
METHODS
Ninety-two women with uterine prolapse underwent sacral colpopexy between January 2011 and September 2016 at Chosun University Hospital. Patients' electronic medical records were investigated for demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative data. Strict definitions were used for all clinically relevant adverse events. Patients' outcomes were documented with 1 self-administered quality of life questionnaires: the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 focused on symptom distress. The primary analysis looking at perioperative and postoperative adverse events was descriptive and statistics were reported for all groups as n/N (%) with 95% confidence intervals for categorical variables and as mean ± standard deviation and mean (range) for all continuous variables.
RESULTS
Their mean age was 69 ± 8.1 years, mean follow-up duration was 12 months, and mean operating time was 61 minutes. There were seven conversions due to anesthetic or surgical difficulties. Follow-up was performed using a telephone questionnaire and physical examination at 12 months. There were three cases of sacral pain with strong analgesics, one of vaginal erosion, two of transient urinary retentions, one of spondylitis, and two of mesh infection. Of the patients, 98.9% were satisfied with the surgical results, while none complained of sexual dysfunction or problems performing her usual activities.
CONCLUSIONS
Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy is a feasible and highly effective technique that offers good long-term results with complication rates similar to those of open surgery with the added benefit of being minimally invasive.

Keyword

Laparoscopy; Postoperative complications; Quality of life; Uterine prolapse

MeSH Terms

Analgesics
Electronic Health Records
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Laparoscopy
Pelvic Floor
Physical Examination
Postoperative Complications
Prolapse
Quality of Life
Spondylitis
Telephone
Uterine Prolapse*
Analgesics

Reference

1. Subak LL, Waetjen LE, van den Eeden S, Thom DH, Vittinghoff E, Brown JS. Cost of pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 98:646–651.

2. Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 89:501–506.

3. Scali P, Blondon J, Bethoux A, Gerard M. Operations of support-suspension by upper route in the treatment of vaginal prolapse. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 1974; 3:365–378.

4. Lefranc JP, Blondon J. Surgery of genital prolapse using the abdominal approach. Experience of the surgery and gynecology department at the Salpetriere Hospital. J Chir (Paris). 1983; 120:431–436.

5. Dorsey JH, Peagues RF. Laparoscopic reconstructive procedures. Obstet Gynecol Forum. 1993; 4:2–6.

6. Dorsey JH, Cundiff G. Laparoscopic procedures for incontinence and prolapse. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 1994; 6:223–230.

7. Cosson M, Bogaert E, Narducci F, Querleu D, Crépin G. Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy: short-term results and complications in 83 patients. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2000; 29:746–750.

8. Fedele L, Garsia S, Bianchi S, Albiero A, Dorta M. A new laparoscopic procedure for the correction of vaginal vault prolapse. J Urol. 1998; 159:1179–1182.

9. Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996; 175:10–17.

10. Barber MD, Kuchibhatla MN, Pieper CF, Bump RC. Psychometric evaluation of 2 comprehensive condition-specific quality of life instruments for women with pelvic floor disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 185:1388–1395.

11. Moore RD, Miklos JR. Colpocleisis and tension-free vaginal tape sling for severe uterine and vaginal prolapse and stress urinary incontinence under local anesthesia. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2003; 10:276–280.

12. Culligan PJ, Murphy M, Blackwell L, Hammons G, Graham C, Heit MH. Long-term success of abdominal sacral colpopexy using synthetic mesh. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 187:1473–1480.

13. Snyder TE, Krantz KE. Abdominal-retroperitoneal sacral colpopexy for the correction of vaginal prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 1991; 77:944–949.

14. Fox SD, Stanton SL. Vault prolapse and rectocele: assessment of repair using sacrocolpopexy with mesh interposition. BJOG. 2000; 107:1371–1375.

15. Roovers JP, van der Vaart CH, van der Bom JG, van Leeuwen JH, Scholten PC, Heintz AP. A randomised controlled trial comparing abdominal and vaginal prolapse surgery: effects on urogenital function. BJOG. 2004; 111:50–56.

16. Shah DK, Paul EM, Rastinehad AR, Eisenberg ER, Badlani GH. Short-term outcome analysis of total pelvic reconstruction with mesh: the vaginal approach. J Urol. 2004; 171:261–263.

17. Cosson M, Debodinance P, Boukerrou M, Chauvet MP, Lobry P, Crépin G, et al. Mechanical properties of synthetic implants used in the repair of prolapse and urinary incontinence in women: which is the ideal material? Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2003; 14:169–178.

18. Deval B, Fauconnier A, Repiquet D, Liou Y, Montuclard B, Fritel X, et al. Surgical treatment of genitourinary prolapse by the abdominal approach. Apropos of a series of 232 cases. Ann Chir. 1997; 51:256–265.

19. Ben Amna M, Grise P, Michot F, Sibert L. Impact of rectal prolapse and rectocele on TVT results. Prog Urol. 2003; 13:453–458.

20. el-Toukhy TA, Davies AE. The efficacy of laparoscopic mesh colposuspension: results of a prospective controlled study. BJU Int. 2001; 88:361–366.

21. Guillonneau B, Abbou CC, Doublet JD, Gaston R, Janetschek G, Mandressi A, et al. Proposal for a “ European Scoring System for Laparoscopic Operations in Urology”. Eur Urol. 2001; 40:2–6.