Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Urogynecology Journal
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal 9/2011

01-09-2011 | Clinical Opinion

Twenty years of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: where are we now?

Authors: Boris Gabriel, Joseph Nassif, Sonia Barata, Arnaud Wattiez

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 9/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) was first described almost 20 years ago. This technique aims to provide the outcomes of the gold standard abdominal approach while offering the benefits of minimally invasive surgery. However, the widespread diffusion of LSC in the management of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is hampered by its presumed length and technical difficulties due to the inherent need for laparoscopic suturing skills.

Methods

In this article, we highlight the current status of LSC based on a historical overview and in the paradigm of an interrelationship between the three different approaches to POP correction.

Results

The enormous changes over the past 15 years have contributed to a better understanding of the pathologies and their treatment, which has enabled us to refine LSC, to simplify it, and to make it much more reproducible.

Conclusions

In the future, we will need more prospective studies to compare LSC with vaginal reconstructive surgery.
Literature
1.
Huguier J, Scali P (1958) Posterior suspension of the genital axis on the lumbosacral disc in the treatment of uterine prolapse. Presse Med 66:781–784PubMed
2.
Maher C, Baessler K, Glazener CM, Adams EJ, Hagen S (20010) Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 14(4):CD004014
3.
Burch JC (1961) Urethrovaginal fixation to Cooper’s ligament for correction of stress incontinence, cystocele, and prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 81:281–290PubMed
4.
Wattiez A, Boughizane S, Alexandre F, Canis M, Mage G, Pouly JL, Bruhat MA (1995) Laparoscopic procedures for stress incontinence and prolapse. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 7:317–321PubMed
5.
Pantazis K, Freeman R, Thomson A et al. (2008) Results from the LAS trial, an RCT comparing open abdominal to laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of posthysterectomy vault prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Suppl 1, Abstract 120, p101
6.
Ganatra AM, Rozet F, Sanchez-Salas R, Barret E, Galiano M, Cathelineau X, Vallancien G (2009) The current status of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a review. Eur Urol 55:1089–1103PubMedCrossRef
7.
Maher CF, Feiner B, de Cuyper E et al. (2009) Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy vs. total vaginal mesh for the management of vaginal vault prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Int Urogynecol J 20 Suppl 2, Abstract 089, p151
8.
Subramanian D, Szwarcensztein K, Mauskopf JA, Slack MC (2009) Rate, type, and cost of pelvic organ prolapse surgery in Germany, France, and England. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 144(2):177–181PubMedCrossRef
9.
Claerhout F, Roovers JP, Lewi P, Verguts J, De Ridder D, Deprest J (2009) Implementation of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy—a single centre’s experience. Int Urogynecol J 20:1119–1125CrossRef
10.
Zacharin RF (1980) Pulsion enterocele: review of functional anatomy of the pelvic floor. Obstet Gynecol 55(2):135–140PubMed
11.
DeLancey JO (1992) Anatomic aspects of vaginal eversion after hysterectomy. Am J ObstetGynecol 166:1717–1724
12.
Petros PE, Ulmsten UI (1990) An integral theory of female urinary incontinence. Experimental and clinical considerations. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Suppl 153:7–31PubMed
13.
Richter K (1968) Die chirurgische Anatomie der Vaginaefixation sacrospinalis vaginalis. Ein Beitrag zur operativen Behandlung des Scheidenblindsackprolapses. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 28:321–327PubMed
14.
Rogers RM Jr (2003) Anatomy of pelvic support. In: Bent AE, Ostergard DR, Cundiff GW, Swift SE (eds) Ostergard’s urogynecology and pelvic floor dysfunction. Lippincott, Philadephia, pp 19–33
15.
Brubaker L, Cundiff GW, Fine P, Nygaard I et al (2006) Abdominal sacrocolpopexy with Burch colposuspension to reduce urinary stress incontinence. N Engl J Med 354(15):1557–1566PubMedCrossRef
16.
Brubaker L, Nygaard I, Richter H, Visco A et al (2008) Two-year outcomes after sacrocolpopexy with and without Burch to prevent stress urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 112:49–55PubMedCrossRef
17.
Costantini E, Lazzeri M, Bini V, Del Zingaro M et al (2008) Burch colposuspension does not provide any additional benefit to pelvic organ prolapse repair in patients with urinary incontinence: a randomized surgical trial. J Urol 180(3):1007–1012PubMedCrossRef
18.
deTayrac R, Gervaise A, Chaubeaud-Lambling A, Fernandez H (2004) Combined genital prolapse repair with a polypropylene mesh and tension free vaginal tape in women with genital prolapse and stress-urinary incontinence: a retrospective case–control study with short-term follow-up. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 83(10):950–954CrossRef
19.
Aungst MJ, Mamienski TD, Albright TS, Zahn CM et al (2009) Prophylactic Burch colposuspension at the time of abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a survey of current practive patterns. Int Urogynecol J 20(8):897–904CrossRef
20.
van der Steen A, van der Ploeg M, Dijkgraaf MG, van der Vaart H et al (2010) Protocol for the CUPIDO trials; multicenter randomized controlled trials to assess the value of combining prolapse surgery and incontinence surgery in patients with genital prolapse and evident stress incontinence (CUPIDO I) and patients with genital prolapse and occult stress incontinence (CUPIDO II). BMC Womens Health 10:16PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Twenty years of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: where are we now?
Authors
Boris Gabriel
Joseph Nassif
Sonia Barata
Arnaud Wattiez
Publication date
01-09-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 9/2011
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-011-1361-z

Other articles of this Issue 9/2011

International Urogynecology Journal 9/2011 Go to the issue

Original Article

Is cesarean section a real panacea to prevent pelvic organ disorders?

Original Article

A comparison of long-term outcome between Manchester Fothergill and vaginal hysterectomy as treatment for uterine descent

Review Article

Development of cellular therapy for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence

Case Report

Large foreign body reaction to tension-free vaginal tape masquerading as inguinal hernia

Letter to the Editor

Treatment of acute radiation cystitis: reply by the authors

Letter to the Editor

Misconception of the Valsalva maneuver