Modified laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for advanced posterior vaginal wall prolapse: a 3-year prospective study
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate and validate the safety and efficacy of modified laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for advanced posterior vaginal wall prolapse at up to 3 years of follow-up. Material and methods: As a prospective observational study, we collected 56 cases with advanced posterior vaginal wall prolapse and performed modified laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (MLSC) with self-cut mesh. The main improvement is the cutting and fixing of the mesh. Patients were followed up at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. The main indicators of follow-up were postoperative anatomic success rate and Pelvic organ prolapse quantitation (POP-Q) score, and secondary indicators were related to quality-of-life scales and postoperative complication rates. Results: All patients completed the operation through minimally invasive surgery, and there were no vital organs and blood vessel damage during the operation. The mean age was (58.32 ± 7.63) years. There was no recurrence of stage I or lower during the follow-up maximum of 36 months (median 24 months), and the anatomic success rate was 100%. The quality-of-life scores improved significantly (p < 0.001) and the quality of sexual life was not affected (p = 0.5). There was 1 case of continuous vaginal mesh exposure at 12 months (2.86%) and 1 case of severe infection with poor healing of vaginal stump within 6 months (1.79%). No one had urinary incontinence (UI) requiring reoperation. Conclusions: In patients with advanced posterior vaginal wall prolapse, MLSC can provide good and durable pelvic floor anatomical recovery and functional outcomes with no specific complications.
Keywords: laparoscopic sacrocolpopexylevator animeshpelvic organ prolapsequality of life
References
- Karram M, Maher C. Surgery for posterior vaginal wall prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2013; 24(11): 1835–1841.
- Barber MD. Pelvic Organ Prolapse. Advanced Health Assessment of Women. 2016.
- Mowat A, Maher D, Baessler K, et al. Surgery for women with posterior compartment prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018; 3(3): CD012975.
- Lewicky-Gaupp C, Yousuf A, Larson KA, et al. Structural position of the posterior vagina and pelvic floor in women with and without posterior vaginal prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 202(5): 497.e1–497.e6.
- Malik RD, Christie AL, Zimmern PE. Posterior Compartment Prolapse Occurrence After Anterior Vaginal Wall Suspension. Urology. 2019; 133: 84–90.
- Lowder JL, Park AJ, Ellison R, et al. The role of apical vaginal support in the appearance of anterior and posterior vaginal prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 111(1): 152–157.
- Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, et al. Surgery for women with anterior compartment prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016; 11(11): CD004014.
- Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, et al. Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016; 10(10): CD012376.
- Mohr S, Imboden S, Mueller MD, et al. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy mesh excision step-by-step. Int Urogynecol J. 2023; 34(8): 1987–1989.
- Haylen B, Wong A, Kerr S. Posterior vaginal compartment repairs: Does vaginal vault (level I) fixation significantly improve the vaginal introital (level III) repair? Neurourology and Urodynamics. 2018; 37(8): 2740–2744.
- Carter-Brooks CM, Lowder JL, Du AL, et al. Restoring Genital Hiatus to Normative Values After Apical Suspension Alone Versus With Level 3 Support Procedures. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2019; 25(3): 226–230.
- Sarlos D, Kots L, Ryu G, et al. Long-term follow-up of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J. 2014; 25(9): 1207–1212.
- Higgs PJ, Chua HL, Smith ARB. Long term review of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. BJOG. 2005; 112(8): 1134–1138.
- DeLancey JO. Structural anatomy of the posterior pelvic compartment as it relates to rectocele. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 180(4): 815–823.
- Teleman P, Stenzelius K, Iorizzo L, et al. Validation of the Swedish short forms of the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7), Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12). Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011; 90(5): 483–487.
- Lau HH, Sun FY, Wang H, et al. Cutoff score of the traditional Chinese version of the short form of the pelvic organ prolapse/urinary incontinence sexual questionnaire (PISQ-12). Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2020; 59(2): 227–230.
- Zhu L, Yu S, Xu T, et al. Chinese validation of the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire Short Form. Menopause. 2011; 18(9): 1030–1033.
- Haylen BT, Vu D, Birrell W, et al. A preliminary anatomical basis for dual (uterosacral and sacrospinous ligaments) vaginal vault support at colporrhaphy. Dual-balanced vaginal vault support at colporrhaphy. Int Urogynecol J. 2012; 23(7): 879–882.
- Sullivan ES, Longaker CJ, Lee PY. Total pelvic mesh repair: a ten-year experience. Dis Colon Rectum. 2001; 44(6): 857–863.
- Oh S, Choi S, Lee SoY, et al. Posterior repair versus no posterior repair for posterior vaginal wall prolapse resolved under simulated apical support at the time of native tissue apical suspension. Int Urogynecol J. 2021; 32(8): 2203–2209.
- Wong V, Guzman Rojas R, Shek KL, et al. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: how low does the mesh go? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 49(3): 404–408.
- Gluck O, Blaganje M, Veit-Rubin N, et al. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: A comprehensive literature review on current practice. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2020; 245: 94–101.
- Gadonneix P, Ercoli A, Salet-Lizée D, et al. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with two separate meshes along the anterior and posterior vaginal walls for multicompartment pelvic organ prolapse. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2004; 11(1): 29–35.
- Liang S, Zhu L, Song X, et al. Long-term outcomes of modified laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for advanced pelvic organ prolapse: a 3-year prospective study. Menopause. 2016; 23(7): 765–770.
- Ramanah R, Ballester M, Chereau E, et al. Anorectal symptoms before and after laparoscopic sacrocolpoperineopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2012; 23(6): 779–783.
- Fox SD, Stanton SL. Vault prolapse and rectocele: assessment of repair using sacrocolpopexy with mesh interposition. BJOG. 2000; 107(11): 1371–1375.
- Grimes C, Lukacz E, Gantz M, et al. What Happens to the Posterior Compartment and Bowel Symptoms After Sacrocolpopexy? Evaluation of 5-Year Outcomes From E-CARE. Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery. 2014; 20(5): 261–266.
- Thibault F, Costa P, Thanigasalam R, et al. Impact of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy on symptoms, health-related quality of life and sexuality: a medium-term analysis. BJU Int. 2013; 112(8): 1143–1149.
- Baines G, Price N, Jefferis H, et al. Mesh-related complications of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J. 2019; 30(9): 1475–1481.
- Unger CA, Paraiso MF, Jelovsek JE, et al. Perioperative adverse events after minimally invasive abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 211(5): 547.e1–547.e8.
- Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, et al. Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 104(4): 805–823.
- Ganatra A, Rozet F, Sanchez-Salas R, et al. The Current Status of Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy: A Review. Eur Urol. 2009; 55(5): 1089–1103.
- Vandendriessche D, Sussfeld J, Giraudet G, et al. Complications and reoperations after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with a mean follow-up of 4 years. Int Urogynecol J. 2017; 28(2): 231–239.
- Ennemoser S, Schönfeld M, von Bodungen V, et al. Clinical relevance of occult stress urinary incontinence (OSUI) following vaginal prolapse surgery: long-term follow-up. Int Urogynecol J. 2012; 23(7): 851–855.
- van der Ploeg JM, Oude Rengerink K, van der Steen A, et al. Dutch Urogynaecology Consortium, Dutch Urogynaecology Consortium. Prolapse surgery with or without stress incontinence surgery for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. BJOG. 2014; 121(5): 537–547.
