Nerve preserving vs standard laparoscopic sacropexy: Postoperative bowel function
- PMID: 28572875
- PMCID: PMC5437387
- DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v9.i5.211
Nerve preserving vs standard laparoscopic sacropexy: Postoperative bowel function
Abstract
Aim: To compare our developed nerve preserving technique with the non-nerve preserving one in terms of de novo bowel symptoms.
Methods: Patients affected by symptomatic apical prolapse, admitted to our department and treated by nerve preserving laparoscopic sacropexy (LSP) between October, 2010 and April, 2013 (Group A or "interventional group") were compared to those treated with the standard LSP, between September, 2007 and December, 2009 (Group B or "control group"). Functional and anatomical data were recorded prospectively at the first clinical review, at 1, 6 mo, and every postsurgical year. Questionnaires were filled in by the patients at each follow-up clinical evaluation.
Results: Forty-three women were enrolled, 25/43 were treated by our nerve preserving technique and 18/43 by the standard one. The data from the interventional group were collected at a similar follow-up (> 18 mo) as those collected for the control group. No cases of de novo bowel dysfunction were observed in group A against 4 cases in group B (P = 0.02). Obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) was highlighted by an increase in specific questionnaires scores and documented by the anorectal manometry. There were no cases of de novo constipation in the two groups. No major intraoperative complications were reported for our technique and it took no longer than the standard procedure. Apical recurrence and late complications were comparable in the two groups.
Conclusion: Our nerve preserving technique seems superior in terms of prevention of de novo bowel dysfunction compared to the standard one and had no major intraoperative complications.
Keywords: Apical prolapse; Bowel dysfunction; Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy; Nerve sparing; Vaginal vault prolapse.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict-of-interest statement: All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Figures



Similar articles
-
Functional outcome after laparoscopic nerve-sparing sacrocolpopexy: a prospective cohort study.Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2018 Jun;97(6):744-750. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13337. Epub 2018 Apr 4. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2018. PMID: 29495121
-
Laparoscopic Nerve-Preserving Sacropexy.J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017 Nov-Dec;24(7):1075-1077. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.03.008. Epub 2017 Mar 18. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2017. PMID: 28323222
-
Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: demonstration of a nerve-sparing technique.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jun;212(6):824.e1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.12.005. Epub 2014 Dec 10. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015. PMID: 25499262
-
Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review.Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Oct;104(4):805-23. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000139514.90897.07. Obstet Gynecol. 2004. PMID: 15458906 Review.
-
Comparison of laparoscopic techniques for apical organ prolapse repair - a systematic review of the literature.Neurourol Urodyn. 2019 Nov;38(8):2031-2050. doi: 10.1002/nau.24115. Epub 2019 Aug 26. Neurourol Urodyn. 2019. PMID: 31452267
Cited by
-
A simplified fascial model of pelvic anatomical surgery: going beyond parametrium-centered surgical anatomy.Anat Sci Int. 2021 Jan;96(1):20-29. doi: 10.1007/s12565-020-00553-z. Epub 2020 Jun 11. Anat Sci Int. 2021. PMID: 32529339 Free PMC article.
-
Relationships between pelvic nerves and levator ani muscle for posterior sacrocolpopexy: an anatomic study.Surg Radiol Anat. 2022 Jun;44(6):891-898. doi: 10.1007/s00276-022-02955-2. Epub 2022 May 23. Surg Radiol Anat. 2022. PMID: 35604460
-
Cross-Cultural Validation of the Renzi Score for Obstructed Defecation Syndrome.Cureus. 2025 Feb 15;17(2):e79058. doi: 10.7759/cureus.79058. eCollection 2025 Feb. Cureus. 2025. PMID: 40099049 Free PMC article.
-
An Anatomical Clue for Minimizing Iliac Vein Injury During the Anterolateral Approach at L5-S1 Level: A Cadaveric Study.Neurospine. 2021 Dec;18(4):833-838. doi: 10.14245/ns.2142494.247. Epub 2021 Dec 31. Neurospine. 2021. PMID: 35000337 Free PMC article.
-
Robot-assisted sacro(hystero)colpopexy with anterior and posterior mesh placement: impact on lower bowel tract function and clinical outcomes at mid-term follow-up.Ther Adv Urol. 2022 Apr 21;14:17562872221090884. doi: 10.1177/17562872221090884. eCollection 2022 Jan-Dec. Ther Adv Urol. 2022. PMID: 35493316 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Arthure HG, Savage D. Uterine prolapse and prolapse of the vaginal vault treated by sacral hysteropexy. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Emp. 1957;64:355–360. - PubMed
-
- Lane FE. Repair of posthysterectomy vaginal-vault prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 1962;20:72–77. - PubMed
-
- Dorsey JH, Sharp HT. Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy and other procedures for prolapse. Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 1995;9:749–756. - PubMed
-
- Wattiez A, Canis M, Mage G, Pouly JL, Bruhat MA. Promontofixation for the treatment of prolapse. Urol Clin North Am. 2001;28:151–157. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Miscellaneous