Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Dec;306(6):2009-2015.
doi: 10.1007/s00404-022-06735-6. Epub 2022 Aug 16.

Single-center study for robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacropexies: a one-fits-all strategy for pelvic organ prolapse?

Pawel Mach  1 , Cara Kaufold  2 , Peter Rusch  2 , Rainer Kimmig  2 , Paul Buderath  2
Affiliations

Single-center study for robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacropexies: a one-fits-all strategy for pelvic organ prolapse?

Pawel Mach et al. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2022 Dec.

Abstract

Purpose: Sarcopenia has been established as the "gold standard" for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Minimal invasive laparoscopy can help to reduce the risks of open access surgery. We compare the surgical results and outcomes of robotic-assisted sacropexies.

Methods: In this monocentric retrospective study we enrolled 49 patients operated on symptomatic POP. Patients were divided into two groups according to the type of robotic-assisted sacropexy: patients with a history of hysterectomy received robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy (RSCP; n = 19), while patients with subtotal hysterectomy received robotic-assisted cervicosacropexy (RCSP; n = 30). Failure was defined as recurrence of the disease with a need for reoperation. Validated questionnaires (the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7 (PFIQ-7)), were used for evaluation of patients quality of life postoperatively.

Results: The comparison between RCSP versus RSCP showed that the latter is related to slightly but not significantly increased recurrence rates and a higher impact of POP symptoms on quality of life in long-term follow-up (p = 0.04). Perioperative data showed similar complication rates in both RSP types but shorter postoperative time of bladder catheterization in the case of RCSP (p = 0.008).

Conclusions: The monocentric long-term data confirm that RSP is a safe and effective method of surgical POP treatment, regardless of the site of the anatomical compartment. In comparison to RSCP, RCSP is associated with a lower impact of POP symptoms on patients' quality of life with a tendency to slightly lower rates of POP recurrence.

Keywords: Cervicosacropexy; POP; Robotic-assisted surgery; Sacrocolpopexy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

References

    1. Wu JM, Matthews CA, Conover MM, et al. Lifetime risk of stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:1201–1206. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000286. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wang J, Wang X, Hua K, Chen Y. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy plus colporrhaphy with a small intestine submucosa graft versus total pelvic floor reconstruction for advanced prolapse: a retrospective cohort study. Int Neurourol J. 2019;23:144–150. doi: 10.5213/inj.1938014.007. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Linder BJ, Occhino JA, Habermann EB, et al. A national contemporary analysis of perioperative outcomes of open versus minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy. J Urol. 2018;200:862–867. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.03.131. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pacquée S, Nawapun K, Claerhout F, et al. Long-term assessment of a prospective cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;134:323–332. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003380. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ganatra AM, Rozet F, Sanchez-Salas R, et al. The current status of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a review. Eur Urol. 2009;55:1089–1103. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.01.048. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types