Published in:
01-11-2020 | Fertility | Clinical Opinion
Update in fertility-sparing native-tissue procedures for pelvic organ prolapse
Authors:
Stefano Manodoro, Andrea Braga, Marta Barba, Giorgio Caccia, Maurizio Serati, Matteo Frigerio
Published in:
International Urogynecology Journal
|
Issue 11/2020
Login to get access
Abstract
Uterine-sparing prolapse surgery has been gaining back popularity with clinicians and patients. Although both prosthetic and native-tissue surgery procedures are described, the latter is progressively regaining a central role in pelvic reconstructive surgery, owing to a lack of mesh-related complications. Available native-tissue procedures have different advantages and pitfalls, as well as different evidence profiles. Most of them offer anatomical and subjective outcomes comparable with those of hysterectomy-based procedures. Moreover, native-tissue procedures in young women desiring childbearing allow to avoid synthetic material implantation, which may lead to potentially serious complications during pregnancy. As a consequence, we do think that offering a reconstructive native-tissue procedure for uterine preservation (with the exception of the Manchester procedure) is the safest option in women wishing for pregnancy. Sacrospinous ligament hysteropexy and high uterosacral ligament hysteropexy may be considered first-line options in consideration of the higher level of evidence and lack of adverse obstetrical outcomes.