Literature DB >> 27403758

One-Year Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy.

Kimberly Kenton1, Elizabeth R Mueller, Christopher Tarney, Catherine Bresee, Jennifer T Anger.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to report anatomic, symptom, and quality of life outcomes in women with symptomatic stage 2 or greater prolapse 1 year after randomization to robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.
METHODS: This is a planned ancillary analysis of the Abdominal Colpopexy: Comparison of Endoscopic Surgical Strategies trial, a randomized comparative effectiveness trial comparing costs and outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy at 2 academic medical centers. At baseline and 1 year after surgery, women underwent standardized assessment including validated subjective pelvic floor outcomes and physical examination with prolapse assessment.
RESULTS: Sixty six (85%) of 78 randomized participants completed 1-year follow-up: 33 (87%) of 38 in the laparoscopic arm and 33 (83%) of 40 in the robotic arm (P = 0.59). Ninety-seven percent (32/33) in the laparoscopic group and 100% (33/33) in the robotic arm considered that their prolapse symptoms improved (P = 0.999). The cohort had significant improvement in all pelvic floor symptom and quality of life measures, which did not differ by treatment arm. Of women who were sexually active at 1 year, sexual function improved in both cohorts. No new serious adverse events, including mesh exposure or reoperation for prolapse, were identified between 6 months and 1 year after surgery. No women had a sacrocolpopexy mesh complication or reoperation for mesh exposure.
CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy is associated with significant improvement in pelvic floor symptoms, anatomy, and sexual function. In addition, mesh exposure rates with lightweight polypropylene mesh seem to be lower than those reported with multifilament and heavier polypropylene mesh.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27403758      PMCID: PMC5070533          DOI: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000300

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


  17 in total

1.  Abdominal Colpopexy: Comparison of Endoscopic Surgical Strategies (ACCESS).

Authors:  E R Mueller; K Kenton; C Tarnay; L Brubaker; A Rosenman; B Smith; K Stroupe; C Bresee; A Pantuck; P Schulam; J T Anger
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2012-05-27       Impact factor: 2.226

2.  The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction.

Authors:  R C Bump; A Mattiasson; K Bø; L P Brubaker; J O DeLancey; P Klarskov; B L Shull; A R Smith
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 8.661

3.  Predicting the number of women who will undergo incontinence and prolapse surgery, 2010 to 2050.

Authors:  Jennifer M Wu; Amie Kawasaki; Andrew F Hundley; Alexis A Dieter; Evan R Myers; Vivian W Sung
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-04-02       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  Prospective study of an ultra-lightweight polypropylene Y mesh for robotic sacrocolpopexy.

Authors:  Charbel G Salamon; Christa Lewis; Jennifer Priestley; Emil Gurshumov; Patrick J Culligan
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-01-08       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Laparoscopic compared with robotic sacrocolpopexy for vaginal prolapse: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Marie Fidela R Paraiso; J Eric Jelovsek; Anna Frick; Chi Chung Grace Chen; Matthew D Barber
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  Lifetime risk of stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse surgery.

Authors:  Jennifer M Wu; Catherine A Matthews; Mitchell M Conover; Virginia Pate; Michele Jonsson Funk
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  Validation of two global impression questionnaires for incontinence.

Authors:  Ilker Yalcin; Richard C Bump
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  Trends in use of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Michele Jonsson Funk; Autumn L Edenfield; Virginia Pate; Anthony G Visco; Alison C Weidner; Jennifer M Wu
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-11-15       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  Risk factors for mesh/suture erosion following sacral colpopexy.

Authors:  Geoffrey W Cundiff; Edward Varner; Anthony G Visco; Halina M Zyczynski; Charles W Nager; Peggy A Norton; Joseph Schaffer; Morton B Brown; Linda Brubaker
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-10-31       Impact factor: 8.661

10.  Subjective and objective results 1 year after robotic sacrocolpopexy using a lightweight Y-mesh.

Authors:  Patrick J Culligan; Emil Gurshumov; Christa Lewis; Jennifer L Priestley; Jodie Komar; Nihar Shah; Charbel G Salamon
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-11-22       Impact factor: 2.894

View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  Robotic Sacrocolpopexy-Is It the Treatment of Choice for Advanced Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse?

Authors:  Janine L Oliver; Ja-Hong Kim
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  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

3.  Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology.

Authors:  Theresa A Lawrie; Hongqian Liu; DongHao Lu; Therese Dowswell; Huan Song; Lei Wang; Gang Shi
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-04-15

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

Authors:  Pawel Mach; Cara Kaufold; Peter Rusch; Rainer Kimmig; Paul Buderath
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2022-08-16       Impact factor: 2.493

5.  Mesh complications after total vs supracervical laparoscopic hysterectomy at time of minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy.

Authors:  Deepanjana Das; Allison Carroll; Margaret Mueller; Kimberly Kenton; Christina Lewicky-Gaupp; Sarah Collins; Julia Geynisman-Tan; C Emi Bretschneider
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2022-06-06       Impact factor: 1.932

6.  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

Review 7.  Mesh exposure following minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: a narrative review.

Authors:  Stephanie Deblaere; Jan Hauspy; Karen Hansen
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 1.932

8.  Pain after permanent versus delayed absorbable monofilament suture for vaginal graft attachment during minimally invasive total hysterectomy and sacrocolpopexy.

Authors:  C Emi Bretschneider; Kimberly Kenton; Elizabeth J Geller; Jennifer M Wu; Catherine A Matthews
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 2.894

9.  Sexual function after robot-assisted prolapse surgery: a prospective study.

Authors:  Femke van Zanten; Cherèl Brem; Egbert Lenters; Ivo A M J Broeders; Steven E Schraffordt Koops
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2018-04-23       Impact factor: 2.894

10.  Robotic Sacrocolpopexy for Treatment of Apical Compartment Prolapse.

Authors:  Kwang Jin Ko; Kyu-Sung Lee
Journal:  Int Neurourol J       Date:  2020-06-30       Impact factor: 2.835

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.