Top

International Urogynecology Journal

Published in:

01-09-2014 | Original Article

Long-term follow-up of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy

Authors: Dimitri Sarlos, LaVonne Kots, Gloria Ryu, Gabriel Schaer

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 9/2014

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

This study evaluates the long-term results of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. In a prior publication, we demonstrated that laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy is a safe method with excellent anatomical results and low recurrence rates after a 12-month follow-up. This study now evaluates the long-term objectives and subjective outcomes of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy after 5 years (mean).

Methods

From 2003 to 2007, a prospective study enrolling 101 patients was conducted to evaluate laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy as a treatment for pelvic organ prolapse. The long-term results were assessed postoperatively after 5 years by gynecological examinations, including the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) system and quality of life assessments using validated questionnaires.

Results

A total of 68 patients received a full clinical follow-up exam between July and September 2011, and 17 patients were assessed by questionnaires only. Altogether, six anatomical recurrences in the anterior, four in the posterior, and one in the apical compartment were found during the 5 years after surgery; 83.8 % of patients had no prolapse in any compartment or stage 0 prolapse according to the International Continence Society (ICS) classification. The total reoperation rate was 3.5 %. Two mesh erosions into the bladder occurred, though no vaginal erosion occurred. The preoperative quality of life index improved from 5.6 to 9.1 (12 months) and 8.3 (60 months) postoperatively, resulting in a subjective cure rate of 95.3 %.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy has demonstrated excellent anatomical and functional long-term results. With the ongoing debate about the complications of vaginal mesh surgery, laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy should be considered a favorable treatment option for patients with pelvic organ prolapse.

Available only for authorised users

Barbalat Y, Tunuguntla HS (2012) Surgery for pelvic organ prolapse: a historical perspective. Curr Urol Rep 13(3):256–261. doi:10.1007/s11934-012-0249-x, PubMed PMID: 22528116PubMedCrossRef

Cvach K, Dwyer P (2012) Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse: abdominal and vaginal approaches. World J Urol 30(4):471–477. doi:10.1007/s00345-011-0776-y, Epub 2011 Oct 22. PubMed PMID: 22020436PubMedCrossRef

Altman D, Väyrynen T, Engh ME, Axelsen S, Falconer C et al (2011) Anterior colporrhaphy versus transvaginal mesh for pelvic-organ prolapse. N Engl J Med 364(19):1826–1836

Nieminen K, Hiltunen R, Takala T, Heiskanen E, Merikari M, Niemi K, Heinonen PK (2010) Outcomes after anterior vaginal wall repair with mesh: a randomized, controlled trial with a 3 year follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol 203(3):235.e1–235.e8

Nguyen JN, Burchette RJ (2008) Outcome after anterior vaginal prolapse repair: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 111(4):891–898PubMedCrossRef

Gomelsky A, Dmochowski RR (2012) Vaginal mesh update. Curr Opin Urol 22(4):271–275PubMedCrossRef

Lowman JK, Jones LA, Woodman PJ, Hale DS (2008) Does the Prolift system cause dyspareunia? Am J Obstet Gynecol. Dec;199(6):707.e1-6

UPDATE on Serious Complications Associated with Transvaginal Placement of Surgical Mesh for Pelvic Organ Prolapse, FDA, July 2011

Davila GW, Baessler K, Cosson M, Cardozo L (2012) Selection of patients in whom vaginal graft use may be appropriate. Consensus of the 2nd IUGA Grafts Roundtable: optimizing safety and appropriateness of graft use in transvaginal pelvic reconstructive surgery. Int Urogynecol J 23(Suppl 1):S7–S14PubMedCrossRef

10.

Maher CM, Feiner B, Baessler K, Glazener CM (2011) Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women: the updated summary version Cochrane review. Int Urogynecol J 22(11):1445–1457. doi:10.1007/s00192-011-1542-9 PubMedCrossRef

11.

Freeman RM, Pantazis K, Thomson A, Frappell J, Bombieri L, Moran P, Slack M, Scott P, Waterfield M (2013) A randomised controlled trial of abdominal versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: LAS study. Int Urogynecol J 24:377–384

12.

Sarlos D, Brandner S, Kots L, Gygax N, Schaer G (2008) Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for uterine and post-hysterectomy prolapse: anatomical results, quality of life and perioperative outcome-a prospective study with 101 cases. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19(10):1415–1422PubMedCrossRef

13.

Kelleher CJ, Cardozo LD, Toozs-Hobson PM (1995) Quality of life and urinary incontinence. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 7(5):404–408PubMedCrossRef

14.

Baessler K, Junginger B (2011) Validation of a pelvic floor questionnaire with improvement and satisfaction scales to assess symptom severity, bothersomeness and quality of life before and after pelvic floor therapy. Aktuelle Urol 42(5):316–322PubMedCrossRef

15.

Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bø K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, Shull BL, Smith AR (1996) The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175(1):10–17PubMedCrossRef

16.

Chmielewski L, Walters MD, Weber AM, Barber MD (2011) Reanalysis of a randomized trial of 3 techniques of anterior colporrhaphy using clinically relevant definitions of success. Am J Obstet Gynecol 205(1):69.e1–69.e8

17.

Maher CF, Feiner B, DeCuyper EM, Nichlos CJ, Hickey KV, O’Rourke P (2011) Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy versus total vaginal mesh for vaginal vault prolapse: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 204:360.e1–360.e7

18.

Sergent F, Resch B, Loisel C, Bisson V, Schaal JP, Marpeau L (2011) Mid-term outcome of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with anterior and posterior polyester mesh for treatment of genito-urinary prolapse. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 156(2):217–222PubMedCrossRef

19.

Tate SB, Blackwell L, Lorenz DJ, Steptoe MM, Culligan PJ (2011) Randomized trial of fascia lata and polypropylene mesh for abdominal sacrocolpopexy: 5-year follow-up. Int Urogynecol J 22(2):137–143PubMedCrossRef

20.

Yau JL, Rahn DD, McIntire DD, Schaffer JI, Wai CY (2007) The natural history of posterior vaginal wall support after abdominal sacrocolpopexy with and without posterior colporrhaphy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 196(5):e45–e47PubMedCrossRef

21.

Maher CF, Qatawneh AM, Dwyer PL, Carey MP, Cornish A, Schluter PJ (2004) Abdominal sacral colpopexy or vaginal sacrospinous colpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse: a prospective randomized study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 190(1):20–26PubMedCrossRef

22.

Nygaard I, Brubaker L, Zyczynski HM, Cundiff G, Richter H, Gantz M, Fine P, Menefee S, Ridgeway B, Visco A, Warren LK, Zhang M, Meikle S (2013) Long-term outcomes following abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. JAMA 309(19):2016–2024PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

23.

Claerhout F, De Ridder D, Roovers JP, Rommens H, Spelzini F, Vandenbroucke V, Coremans G, Deprest J (2009) Medium-term anatomic and functional results of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy beyond the learning curve. Eur Urol 55(6):1459–1467PubMedCrossRef

24.

Higgs PJ, Chua HL, Smith AR (2005) Long term review of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. BJOG 112(8):1134–1138PubMedCrossRef

25.

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(5):1089–1103PubMedCrossRef

26.

Haylen BT, Freeman RM, Swift SE, Cosson M, Davila GW, Deprest J, Dwyer PL, Fatton B, Kocjancic E, Lee J, Maher C, Petri E, Rizk DE, Sand PK, Schaer GN, Webb RJ (2011) An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint terminology and classification of the complications related directly to the insertion of prostheses (meshes, implants, tapes) & grafts in female pelvic floor surgery. Int Urogynecol J 22(1):3–15PubMedCrossRef

Title: Long-term follow-up of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy
Authors: Dimitri Sarlos
LaVonne Kots
Gloria Ryu
Gabriel Schaer
Publication date: 01-09-2014
Publisher: Springer London
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 9/2014
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2369-y

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Long-term follow-up of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 9/2014

Is de novo stress incontinence after sacrocolpopexy related to anatomical changes and surgical approach?

Autologous transobturator midurethral sling placement: a novel outpatient procedure for female stress urinary incontinence

More research is needed before we regard POP-Q stage 1 prolapse as normal

Analysis of the learning process for laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: identification of challenging steps

Four-defect repair in women with symptomatic anterior compartment prolapse: a large cohort study

The improvement in pelvic floor symptoms with weight loss in obese women does not correlate with the changes in pelvic anatomy