Top

International Urogynecology Journal

Published in:

01-09-2015 | Original Article

Midterm results of robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy

Authors: Carolin Eva Hach, Joschka Krude, Andre Reitz, Michael Reiter, Axel Haferkamp, Stephan Buse

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 9/2015

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Robotic assistance simplifies laparoscopic procedures. We hypothesize that robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy is a rapid and safe procedure with satisfying short-term and midterm functional results.

Methods

After informed consent, we enrolled 101 consecutive patients undergoing sacrocolpopexy at Alfried Krupp Hospital, Essen, Germany. After a median follow-up of 22 months, we assessed midterm functional results as the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included surgical duration, blood loss, intraoperative complications, and postoperative complications. We described frequencies as counts (percent) and continuous data as median [interquartile range (Q1–Q3)] or mean [standard deviation (SD)], as appropriate.

Results

We enrolled 101 patients. The mean age was 69 years (SD 11); 75 women (74.3 %) had undergone previous abdominal surgery. Among the patients, 95 (94.1 %) presented with anterior vaginal wall prolapse Baden-Walker grade 2–3, 74 (73.3 %) vaginal vault prolapse, and 9 (8.9 %) concomitant rectocele. Fifty (50 %) patients underwent a modified Burch procedure in addition to sacrocolpopexy. The median surgical duration was 96 min (Q1–Q3 83–130). There were six (5.9 %) minor intraoperative complications but no conversions to open surgery. Postoperatively, we registered five (4.9 %) Clavien-Dindo grade I complications, three (3.0 %) grade II complications, and one (1.0 %) grade III complication. After a median follow-up of 22 months (Q1–Q3 12–49), the patients reported significant decreased impact of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) on quality of life as well as bother resulting from POP symptoms. The overall success rate, defined as none or minor impact of POP on quality of life, was 75 %.

Conclusions

In this single-surgeon study, robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy was a safe and rapidly performed procedure that achieved good medium-term functional results.

Samuelsson EC, Victor FT, Tibblin G, Svärdsudd KF (1999) Signs of genital prolapse in a Swedish population of women 20 to 59 years of age and possible related factors. Am J Obstet Gynecol 180(2 Pt 1):299–305CrossRefPubMed

Deval B, Haab F (2003) What’s new in prolapse surgery? Curr Opin Urol 13(4):315–323CrossRefPubMed

Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL (1997) Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 89(4):501–506CrossRefPubMed

Subak LL, Waetjen LE, van den Eeden S, Thom DH, Vittinghoff E, Brown JS (2001) Cost of pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 98(4):646–651CrossRefPubMed

Luber KM, Boero S, Choe JY (2001) The demographics of pelvic floor disorders: current observations and future projections. Am J Obstet Gynecol 184(7):1496–1501, discussion 1501–1503CrossRefPubMed

Ganatra AM, Rozet F, Sanchez-Salas R et al (2009) The current status of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a review. Eur Urol 55(5):1089–1103CrossRefPubMed

Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Schmid C (2013) Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:CD004014. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004014.pub5 PubMed

Cosson M, Rajabally R, Bogaert E, Querleu D, Crépin G (2002) Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy, hysterectomy, and Burch colposuspension: feasibility and short-term complications of 77 procedures. JSLS 6(2):115–119PubMedCentralPubMed

Gadonneix P, Ercoli A, Salet-Lizée D et al (2004) Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with two separate meshes along the anterior and posterior vaginal walls for multicompartment pelvic organ prolapse. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 11(1):29–35CrossRefPubMed

10.

Hsiao KC, Latchamsetty K, Govier FE, Kozlowski P, Kobashi KC (2007) Comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. J Endourol 21(8):926–930CrossRefPubMed

11.

Klauschie JL, Suozzi BA, O’Brien MM, McBride AW (2009) A comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal sacral colpopexy: objective outcome and perioperative differences. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 20(3):273–279CrossRefPubMed

12.

Paraiso MF, Walters MD, Rackley RR, Melek S, Hugney C (2005) Laparoscopic and abdominal sacral colpopexies: a comparative cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 192(5):1752–1758CrossRefPubMed

13.

Sundaram CP, Venkatesh R, Landman J, Klutke CG (2004) Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the correction of vaginal vault prolapse. J Endourol 18(7):620–623, discussion 623–624CrossRefPubMed

14.

Akl MN, Long JB, Giles DL et al (2009) Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: technique and learning curve. Surg Endosc 23(10):2390–2394CrossRefPubMed

15.

Daneshgari F, Kefer JC, Moore C, Kaouk J (2007) Robotic abdominal sacrocolpopexy/sacrouteropexy repair of advanced female pelvic organ prolapse (POP): utilizing POP-quantification-based staging and outcomes. BJU Int 100(4):875–879CrossRefPubMed

16.

Elliott DS, Krambeck AE, Chow GK (2006) Long-term results of robotic assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of high grade vaginal vault prolapse. J Urol 176(2):655–659CrossRefPubMed

17.

Geller EJ, Siddiqui NY, Wu JM, Visco AG (2008) Short-term outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy compared with abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Obstet Gynecol 112(6):1201–1206CrossRefPubMed

18.

Kramer BA, Whelan CM, Powell TM, Schwartz BF (2009) Robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy as management for pelvic organ prolapse. J Endourol 23(4):655–658CrossRefPubMed

19.

Serati M, Bogani G, Sorice P et al (2014) Robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol 66(2):303–318. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2014.02.053 CrossRefPubMed

20.

Ploumidis A, Spinoit AF, De Naeyer G et al (2014) Robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: surgical technique and outcomes at a single high-volume institution. Eur Urol 65(1):138–145. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.054 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

22.

Baessler K, O’Neill SM, Maher CF, Battistutta D (2010) A validated self-administered female pelvic floor questionnaire. Int Urogynecol J 21(2):163–172. doi:10.1007/s00192-009-0997-4 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Digesu GA, Khullar V, Cardozo L, Robinson D, Salvatore S (2005) P-QOL: a validated questionnaire to assess the symptoms and quality of life of women with urogenital prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 16(3):176–181. doi:10.1007/s00192-004-1225-x, discussion 181CrossRefPubMed

24.

Culligan PJ, Gurshumov E, Lewis C et al (2014) Subjective and objective results 1 year after robotic sacrocolpopexy using a lightweight Y-mesh. Int Urogynecol J 25(6):731–735. doi:10.1007/s00192-013-2265-x CrossRefPubMed

Title: Midterm results of robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy
Authors: Carolin Eva Hach
Joschka Krude
Andre Reitz
Michael Reiter
Axel Haferkamp
Stephan Buse
Publication date: 01-09-2015
Publisher: Springer London
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 9/2015
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-015-2688-7

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Midterm results of robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 9/2015

Predictors for de novo stress urinary incontinence following extensive pelvic reconstructive surgery

Erratum to: The introduction of mid-urethral slings: an evaluation of literature

Urogynecology digest

Response to the Letter to the Editor by Waarsenburg et al.

The Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12): validation of the Dutch version

Does anesthetic method influence vaginal bulge symptoms and patient satisfaction after vaginal wall repair surgery?