Zoe S Gan1, Daniel S Roberson2, Ariana L Smith2. 1. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, PCAM 3-334W, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. zoe.gan@pennmedicine.upenn.edu. 2. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, PCAM 3-334W, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss considerations for hysteropexy for apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and summarize available literature comparing various hysteropexy techniques to analogous procedures involving hysterectomy. RECENT FINDINGS: Hysteropexy for apical POP has increased in popularity in recent years, although anatomic factors and gynecologic cancer risk must be taken into account. Native tissue hysteropexy options include the LeFort colpocleisis, sacrospinous hysteropexy, and uterosacral hysteropexy. Although vaginal mesh was banned by the Food and Drug Administration in 2019, abdominal mesh sacrohysteropexy done either open or laparoscopically remains an option in the USA. Overall, short-term prolapse outcomes appear to be comparable between uterus-sparing approaches and hysterectomy, with less blood loss and shorter operating room time observed with the uterine-sparing approaches, although long-term outcome data remains variable and limited. Uterine-sparing apical POP repair may be offered to appropriate patients without certain risk factors, although longer-term data will be required to evaluate durability.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss considerations for hysteropexy for apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and summarize available literature comparing various hysteropexy techniques to analogous procedures involving hysterectomy. RECENT FINDINGS: Hysteropexy for apical POP has increased in popularity in recent years, although anatomic factors and gynecologic cancer risk must be taken into account. Native tissue hysteropexy options include the LeFort colpocleisis, sacrospinous hysteropexy, and uterosacral hysteropexy. Although vaginal mesh was banned by the Food and Drug Administration in 2019, abdominal mesh sacrohysteropexy done either open or laparoscopically remains an option in the USA. Overall, short-term prolapse outcomes appear to be comparable between uterus-sparing approaches and hysterectomy, with less blood loss and shorter operating room time observed with the uterine-sparing approaches, although long-term outcome data remains variable and limited. Uterine-sparing apical POP repair may be offered to appropriate patients without certain risk factors, although longer-term data will be required to evaluate durability.
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
Authors: Anna C Frick; Matthew D Barber; Marie Fidela R Paraiso; Beri Ridgeway; John Eric Jelovsek; Mark D Walters Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2013 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: Jason D Wright; Thomas J Herzog; Jennifer Tsui; Cande V Ananth; Sharyn N Lewin; Yu-Shiang Lu; Alfred I Neugut; Dawn L Hershman Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Malcolm C Pike; Paul D P Pharoah; Celeste Leigh Pearce; Daniel O Stram; Roberta B Ness; Douglas A Stram; Lynda D Roman; Claire Templeman; Alice W Lee; Usha Menon; Peter A Fasching; Jessica N McAlpine; Jennifer A Doherty; Francesmary Modugno; Joellen M Schildkraut; Mary Anne Rossing; David G Huntsman; Anna H Wu; Andrew Berchuck Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2015-01-26 Impact factor: 4.254