Atef Darwish1, Mostafa Bahlol2, AbdelGhafar Ahmad2, Mohamed Fekry2. 1. Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Women's Health University Hospital, P.O. Box: 1, Assiut, 71111, Egypt. atef_darwish@yahoo.com. 2. Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Women's Health University Hospital, P.O. Box: 1, Assiut, 71111, Egypt.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Our aim was to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and effectiveness of a vaginolaparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (VLS) technique for treating apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective interventional case series (design classification: Canadian Task Force II3) performed in the endoscopic unit of a tertiary care referral facility and university hospital. We assessed 15 symptomatic parous women with stage ≥2 apical POP according to the POP Quantification (POP-Q) classification. Interventions comprised posterior colpotomy with mesh fixation to the uterosacral ligaments and the back of the uterus that was further fixed to the anterior longitudinal ligament of the sacrum using a tacker via laparoscopy. RESULTS: The main outcome was a significant postoperative improvement in prolapse and resultant improvement in quality of life (QoL) after VLS. Six patients required concomitant reconstructive procedures. Mean operative time for the vaginal phase was 8.54 ± 3.10 (7-12) min and 32.36 ± 8.2 (27-41) min. for the laparoscopic phase Mean duration of VLS ranged from 30 to 50 min. At the 6-months follow-up, the procedure was successful in 14 of 15 patients (93.34%); one woman (6.66%) presented with recurrence at a lower stage. Neither mesh complications nor sacral ostitis were encountered. There was significant improvement in vaginal symptoms, sexual well-being, QoL, and clinical staging after the procedure. CONCLUSION: By eliminating all forms of intraperitoneal suturing, performing a posterior colpotomy, and the advent of tackers without evidence of sacral ostitis, VLS seems to be a simple, feasible, effective, and fast approach for treating POP.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Our aim was to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and effectiveness of a vaginolaparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (VLS) technique for treating apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective interventional case series (design classification: Canadian Task Force II3) performed in the endoscopic unit of a tertiary care referral facility and university hospital. We assessed 15 symptomatic parous women with stage ≥2 apical POP according to the POP Quantification (POP-Q) classification. Interventions comprised posterior colpotomy with mesh fixation to the uterosacral ligaments and the back of the uterus that was further fixed to the anterior longitudinal ligament of the sacrum using a tacker via laparoscopy. RESULTS: The main outcome was a significant postoperative improvement in prolapse and resultant improvement in quality of life (QoL) after VLS. Six patients required concomitant reconstructive procedures. Mean operative time for the vaginal phase was 8.54 ± 3.10 (7-12) min and 32.36 ± 8.2 (27-41) min. for the laparoscopic phase Mean duration of VLS ranged from 30 to 50 min. At the 6-months follow-up, the procedure was successful in 14 of 15 patients (93.34%); one woman (6.66%) presented with recurrence at a lower stage. Neither mesh complications nor sacral ostitis were encountered. There was significant improvement in vaginal symptoms, sexual well-being, QoL, and clinical staging after the procedure. CONCLUSION: By eliminating all forms of intraperitoneal suturing, performing a posterior colpotomy, and the advent of tackers without evidence of sacral ostitis, VLS seems to be a simple, feasible, effective, and fast approach for treating POP.
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
Authors: Ingrid E Nygaard; Rebecca McCreery; Linda Brubaker; AnnaMarie Connolly; Geoff Cundiff; Anne M Weber; Halina Zyczynski Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Renée J Detollenaere; Jan den Boon; Jelle Stekelenburg; Joanna IntHout; Mark E Vierhout; Kirsten B Kluivers; Hugo W F van Eijndhoven Journal: BMJ Date: 2015-07-23