Literature DB >> 27054799

Outcomes in 450 Women After Minimally Invasive Abdominal Sacrocolpopexy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse.

Margaret G Mueller1, Kristin M Jacobs, Elizabeth R Mueller, Melinda G Abernethy, Kimberly S Kenton.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To report outcomes and complications in approximately 450 women who underwent isolated minimally invasive abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) for the management of pelvic organ prolapse (POP).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records of women who underwent minimally invasive ASC (laparoscopic ASC [LASC] or robotic ASC [RASC]) for symptomatic POP at Loyola University Chicago Medical Center from 2007 to 2012. Polypropylene mesh was used and the decision to reperitonealize the mesh was left to surgeon discretion. Data collected included demographics, Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory questionnaire, intraoperative and postoperative details, and POP quantification.
RESULTS: Four hundred twenty-eight women underwent minimally invasive ASC-232 LASC and 226 RASC. Most women (86%) did not undergo reperitonealization of the mesh. Median follow-up was 13 weeks (range, 2-268 weeks) for complications and 13 weeks (range, 2-104 weeks) for anatomic outcomes.Postoperatively, 88.6% of women had stage 0/I, 10.7% had stage II, and 2 women had stage III POP. Twelve (2.6%) underwent reoperation, 6 for POP (3 posterior repairs, 2 repeat ASC, 1 perineorrhaphy) and 6 for bowel complications. Fourteen women had postoperative bowel complications; half of which resolved with conservative treatment. There were no differences between anatomic and functional outcomes or bowel complications between LASC and RASC. Reoperation rates for bowel complications in women who underwent reperitonealization of the mesh were similar to those who did not (1.5% vs 1.0%, P = 0.86).
CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive ASC without concomitant vaginal repair is an effective and safe procedure for the surgical management of POP with low rates of reoperation and complications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27054799     DOI: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000269

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 2151-8378            Impact factor:   2.091


  7 in total

1.  Assessing pelvic organ prolapse recurrence after minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: does mesh weight matter?

Authors:  Lauren E Giugale; Molly M Hansbarger; Amy L Askew; Anthony G Visco; Jonathan P Shepherd; Megan S Bradley
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2021-02-26       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 2.  Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy: How to Avoid Short- and Long-Term Complications.

Authors:  Catherine A Matthews
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 3.092

3.  Contemporary Use and Techniques of Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy With or Without Robotic Assistance for Pelvic Organ Prolapse.

Authors:  Patrick J Culligan; Cristina M Saiz; Peter L Rosenblatt
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2022-04-05       Impact factor: 7.623

4.  Laparoscopic cervicopexy for correction of apical genital prolapse in 10 steps: a pilot study.

Authors:  Casadio Paolo; Arena Alessandro; Paolo Salucci; Raimondo Diego; Seracchioli Renato
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2020-09-25       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 5.  Robotic-assisted repair of pelvic organ prolapse: a scoping review of the literature.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Schachar; Catherine A Matthews
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-04

6.  Sacrocolpopexy: Patient Outcomes Support the Use of Non-Crosslinked Acellular Dermal Matrix as an Alternative to the Synthetic Polypropylene Mesh.

Authors:  Magdalene Karon; Somu Chatterjee
Journal:  J Gynecol Surg       Date:  2019-12-09

7.  Robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jiang Yang; Yong He; Xiaoyi Zhang; Zhi Wang; Xiaohu Zuo; Likun Gao; Li Hong
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-03
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.