Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy compared with open abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vault prolapse repair: a randomised controlled trial
- PMID: 28417153
- PMCID: PMC5606943
- DOI: 10.1007/s00192-017-3296-5
Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy compared with open abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vault prolapse repair: a randomised controlled trial
Abstract
Introduction and hypothesis: The objective was to evaluate the functional outcome after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus open sacrocolpopexy in women with vault prolapse.
Methods: A multicentre randomised controlled trial was carried out at four teaching and two university hospitals in the Netherlands in women with symptomatic vault prolapse requiring surgical treatment. Participants were randomised for laparoscopic or open sacrocolpopexy. Primary outcome was disease-specific quality of life measured using the Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI) questionnaire at 12 months' follow-up. Secondary outcomes included anatomical outcome and perioperative data. We needed 74 participants to show a difference of 10 points on the prolapse domain of the UDI 12 months after surgery (power of 80%, α error 0.05).
Results: Between 2007 and 2012, a total of 74 women were randomised. Follow-up after 12 months showed no significant differences in domain scores of the UDI between the two groups. After 12 months, both groups reported a UDI score of 0.0 (IQR: 0-0) for the domain "genital prolapse", which was the primary outcome. There were no significant differences between the two groups (p = 0.93). The number of severe complications was 4 in the laparoscopic group versus 7 in the open abdominal group (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.50-2.27). There was less blood loss and a shorter hospital stay after laparoscopy; 2 (IQR 2-3) versus 4 (IQR 3-5) days, which was statistically different. There was no significant difference in anatomical outcome at 12 months.
Conclusion: Our trial provides evidence to support a laparoscopic approach when performing sacrocolpopexy, as there was less blood loss and hospital stay was shorter, whereas functional and anatomical outcome were not statistically different.
Keywords: Pelvic organ prolapse; Sacral colpopexy; Sacrocolpopexy; Vault prolapse.
Conflict of interest statement
Funding
No financial disclaimer.
Ethics approval
The study was approved by the ethics committees of all the participating hospitals.
Trial registration number: NTR 3276:
Conflicts of interest
None.
Figures
Comment in
-
Commentary on: Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy compared with open abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vault prolapse repair: a randomised controlled trial.Int Urogynecol J. 2018 Mar;29(3):453. doi: 10.1007/s00192-017-3490-5. Epub 2017 Oct 13. Int Urogynecol J. 2018. PMID: 29027567 No abstract available.
-
Re: Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy Compared with Open Abdominal Sacrocolpopexy for Vault Prolapse Repair: A Randomised Controlled Trial.J Urol. 2020 Apr;203(4):666-667. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000733. Epub 2020 Jan 13. J Urol. 2020. PMID: 31928488 No abstract available.
References
-
- Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Schmid C. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women (review) Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:1–161. - PubMed
-
- Snyder TE, Krantz KE. Abdominal-retroperitoneal sacral colpopexy for the correction of vaginal prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 1991;77(6):944–949. - PubMed
-
- Timmons MC, Addison WA, Addison SB, Cavenar MG. Abdominal sacral colpopexy in 163 women with posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse and enterocele: evolution of operative techniques. J Reprod Med Obstet Gynecol. 1992;37(4):323–327. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical