Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy versus vaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy as treatment for uterine descent: comparison of long-term outcomes

Anique M J van Oudheusden*, Anne-Lotte W M Coolen, Hilde Hoskam, Joggem Veen, Marlies Y Bongers

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a frequent occurring health issue, especially concerning elderly women. The objective of this study is to examine the long-term outcomes of laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy (LSH) and vaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSHP) for treatment of uterine prolapse.

METHODS: A retrospective study of patients who underwent a LSH or SSHP. Validated questionnaires and an outpatient examination visit were used to investigate the effects of both surgical treatments. The primary outcome was the composite outcome of success for the apical compartment, defined as no recurrence of uterine prolapse (POP-Q measurement C ≤ 0), no subjective recurrence of POP, and/or not requiring therapy for recurrent prolapse. Secondary outcomes were peri- and postoperative data, anatomical failure, prolapse beyond hymen, subjective outcomes, and disease-specific quality of life.

RESULTS: We included 105 patients, 53 in the LSH group and 52 in the SSHP group. The overall response rate of the questionnaires was 83% (n = 87) after a mean follow-up time of 4.5 years (54.2 months; 95% CI 44.8-64.2 months) in the LSH group and 2.5 years (30.1 months; 95% CI 29.3-31.5 months) in the SSHP group. There were no clinically relevant differences between the study groups in composite outcome of success (p = 0.073), anatomical failure of the apical compartment (p = 0.711), vaginal bulge symptoms for which patients consulted professionals (p = 0.126), and patient satisfaction (p = 0.741). The operative time was longer in the LSH group (117 min; interquartile range (IQR) 110-123) compared to the SSHP group (67 minutes; IQR 60-73) (p < 0.001). The duration of hospital stay was also longer in the LSH group (4 days) than in the SSHP group (3 days) (p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS: LSH and SSHP seem to be equally effective after long-term follow-up in treating uterine prolapse in terms of objective and subjective recurrence.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)211-223
Number of pages13
JournalInternational Urogynecology Journal
Volume34
Issue number1
Early online date28 Apr 2022
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2023

Keywords

  • Apical prolapse
  • EPIDEMIOLOGY
  • FOLLOW-UP
  • HYSTERECTOMY
  • ICS JOINT REPORT
  • INCONTINENCE
  • LIFETIME RISK
  • Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy
  • PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE
  • SUSPENSION
  • Sacrospinous hysteropexy
  • Sacrospinous ligament fixation
  • TERMINOLOGY
  • Uterine descent
  • Uterine prolapse
  • VALIDATION

Cite this