Helen Jefferis1, Natalia Price2, Simon Jackson2. 1. Department of Urogynaecology, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK. helenjefferis@doctors.org.uk. 2. Department of Urogynaecology, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Uterine prolapse is common and has traditionally been treated by vaginal hysterectomy. Increasingly, women are seeking uterine-preserving alternatives. Laparoscopic hysteropexy offers resuspension of the uterus using polypropylene mesh. We report on 10 years' experience with this technique. METHODS: All hysteropexy procedures in our unit since 2006 were reviewed. Primary outcome was safety of hysteropexy, as assessed by intraoperative and major postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes were measures of feasibility, including operating time, length of stay, conversion to alternative procedures, change in point C, patient satisfaction, and repeat apical prolapse surgery. RESULTS: Data were available for 507 women. Complications were rare (1.8%) with no evidence of any mesh exposure. Mean operating time was 62.5 min and median length of stay 2 nights. In 17 patients (3.4%), hysteropexy was abandoned. There was a mean change in point C of 7.9 cm and 93.8% of patients felt that their prolapse was "very much" or "much" better. Of these women, 2.8% have had repeat apical surgery. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the largest series to date, describing 10 years' experience with laparoscopic hysteropexy. The surgical technique appears to be safe, with low complication rates, which supports the choice of appropriately selected women to opt for uterine preservation surgery as an alternative to hysterectomy for the management of uterine prolapse.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Uterine prolapse is common and has traditionally been treated by vaginal hysterectomy. Increasingly, women are seeking uterine-preserving alternatives. Laparoscopic hysteropexy offers resuspension of the uterus using polypropylene mesh. We report on 10 years' experience with this technique. METHODS: All hysteropexy procedures in our unit since 2006 were reviewed. Primary outcome was safety of hysteropexy, as assessed by intraoperative and major postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes were measures of feasibility, including operating time, length of stay, conversion to alternative procedures, change in point C, patient satisfaction, and repeat apical prolapse surgery. RESULTS: Data were available for 507 women. Complications were rare (1.8%) with no evidence of any mesh exposure. Mean operating time was 62.5 min and median length of stay 2 nights. In 17 patients (3.4%), hysteropexy was abandoned. There was a mean change in point C of 7.9 cm and 93.8% of patients felt that their prolapse was "very much" or "much" better. Of these women, 2.8% have had repeat apical surgery. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the largest series to date, describing 10 years' experience with laparoscopic hysteropexy. The surgical technique appears to be safe, with low complication rates, which supports the choice of appropriately selected women to opt for uterine preservation surgery as an alternative to hysterectomy for the management of uterine prolapse.
Entities:
Keywords:
Laparoscopic hysteropexy; Pelvic organ prolapse; Uterine preservation
Authors: A G Visco; A C Weidner; M D Barber; E R Myers; G W Cundiff; R C Bump; W A Addison Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Osanna Y K Wan; Rachel Y K Cheung; Symphorosa S C Chan; Tony K H Chung Journal: Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol Date: 2013-01-15 Impact factor: 2.100
Authors: Georgina Baines; Natalia Price; Helen Jefferis; Rufus Cartwright; Simon R Jackson Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2019-04-30 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Ivan Ignjatovic; Milan Potic; Dragoslav Basic; Ljubomir Dinic; Aleksandar Skakic Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2020-09-08 Impact factor: 2.894