OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to review the history of surgical treatment of vaginal vault prolapse, its current treatments, and its outcomes. METHODS: A PubMed search was conducted using the following terms: vaginal vault prolapse, apical prolapse, surgical treatments, culdoplasty, uterosacral ligament fixation, and sacral colpopexy. RESULTS: Vaginal vault prolapse is a common condition with many surgical treatment options. Surgical principles and treatment of this condition dates back to the 19th century. Native tissue repairs such as McCall culdoplasty, uterosacral ligament fixation, and sacrospinous fixation have high overall success rates with restoring apical anatomy. Sacral colpopexy also has excellent success rates when mesh is needed to augment repairs. CONCLUSIONS: There are many options for the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. Modifications have been made to the original procedures; however, the basic principles are still applicable and include attaching the vaginal apex to level 1 support.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to review the history of surgical treatment of vaginal vault prolapse, its current treatments, and its outcomes. METHODS: A PubMed search was conducted using the following terms: vaginal vault prolapse, apical prolapse, surgical treatments, culdoplasty, uterosacral ligament fixation, and sacral colpopexy. RESULTS:Vaginal vault prolapse is a common condition with many surgical treatment options. Surgical principles and treatment of this condition dates back to the 19th century. Native tissue repairs such as McCall culdoplasty, uterosacral ligament fixation, and sacrospinous fixation have high overall success rates with restoring apical anatomy. Sacral colpopexy also has excellent success rates when mesh is needed to augment repairs. CONCLUSIONS: There are many options for the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. Modifications have been made to the original procedures; however, the basic principles are still applicable and include attaching the vaginal apex to level 1 support.
Authors: Carolien K M Vermeulen; Anne Lotte W M Coolen; Wilbert A Spaans; Jan Paul W R Roovers; Marlies Y Bongers Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2018-12-04 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: C Emi Bretschneider; Karl Jallad; Patrick M Lang; Mickey M Karram; Mark D Walters Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2017-02-06 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Katherine L Woodburn; Amr Sherif El Haraki; Andrew I Sokol; Robert E Gutman; Catherine A Matthews Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2022-02-14 Impact factor: 1.932