A Review of the Current Status of Laparoscopic and Robot-assisted Sacrocolpopexy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse.

[en] CONTEXT: Abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) represents the superior treatment for apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP) but is associated with increased length of stay, analgesic requirement, and cost compared with transvaginal procedures. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy (RSC) may offer shorter postoperative recovery while maintaining equivalent rates of cure. OBJECTIVE: This review evaluates the literature on LSC and RSC for clinical outcomes and complications. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A PubMed search of the available literature from 1966 to 2013 on LSC and RSC with a follow-up of at least 12 mo was performed. A total of 256 articles were screened, 69 articles selected, and outcomes from 26 presented. A review, not meta-analysis, was conducted due to the quality of the articles. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: LSC has become a mature technique with results from 11 patient series encompassing 1221 patients with a mean follow-up of 26 mo. Mean operative time was 124min (range: 55-185) with a 3% (range: 0-11%) conversion rate. Objective cure was achieved in 91% of patients, with similar satisfaction rates (92%). Six patient series encompassing 363 patients treated with RSC with a mean follow-up of 28 mo have been reported. Mean operative time was 202min (range: 161-288) with a 1% (range: 0-4%) conversion rate. Objective cure rate was 94%, with a 95% subjective success rate. Overall, early outcomes and complication rates for both LSC and RSC appeared comparable with open ASC. CONCLUSIONS: LSC and RSC provide excellent short- to medium-term reconstructive outcomes for patients with POP. RSC is more expensive than LSC. Further studies are required to better understand the clinical performance of RSC versus LSC and confirm long-term efficacy. PATIENT SUMMARY: Laparoscopic and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy represent attractive minimally invasive alternatives to abdominal sacrocolpopexy. They may offer reduced patient morbidity but are associated with higher costs.

Disciplines :

Urology & nephrology

Author, co-author :

Lee, Richard K.

Mottrie, Alexandre

Payne, Christopher K.

Waltregny, David ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département des sciences cliniques > Urologie

Language :

English

Title :

A Review of the Current Status of Laparoscopic and Robot-assisted Sacrocolpopexy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse.

Publication date :

2014

Journal title :

European Urology

ISSN :

0302-2838

eISSN :

1873-7560

Publisher :

Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Volume :

Issue :

Pages :

1128-1137

Peer reviewed :

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Commentary :

Available on ORBi :

since 18 May 2014

Statistics

Number of views

71 (3 by ULiège)

Number of downloads

1 (1 by ULiège)

More statistics

Scopus citations^®

Scopus citations^®
without self-citations

OpenCitations

Bibliography

E.H. Sze, N. Kohli, J.R. Miklos, T. Roat, and M.M. Karram A retrospective comparison of abdominal sacrocolpopexy with Burch colposuspension versus sacrospinous fixation with transvaginal needle suspension for the management of vaginal vault prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 10 1999 390 393
C. Maher, B. Feiner, K. Baessler, E.J. Adams, S. Hagen, and C.M. Glazener Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010 CD004014
S. Mustafa, A. Amit, and S. Filmar et al. Implementation of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: establishment of a learning curve and short-term outcomes Arch Gynecol Obstet 286 2012 983 988
I. Nygaard, L. Brubaker, and H.M. Zyczynski et al. Long-term outcomes following abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse JAMA 309 2013 2016 2024
C.E. North, N.S. Ali-Ross, A.R. Smith, and F.M. Reid A prospective study of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the management of pelvic organ prolapse BJOG 116 2009 1251 1257
A.L. Tome, M. Tobias-Machado, and W.F. Correa Laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) sacrocolpopexy: feasibility and efficacy of knotless procedure performed with conventional instruments Int Urogynecol J 22 2011 885 887
F. Claerhout, D. De Ridder, and J.P. Roovers et al. Medium-term anatomic and functional results of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy beyond the learning curve Eur Urol 55 2009 1459 1468
T. Perez, P. Crochet, and G. Descargues et al. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for management of pelvic organ prolapse enhances quality of life at one year: a prospective observational study J Minim Invasive Gynecol 18 2011 747 754
F. Sergent, B. Resch, C. Loisel, V. Bisson, J.P. Schaal, and L. Marpeau Mid-term outcome of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with anterior and posterior polyester mesh for treatment of genito-urinary prolapse Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 156 2011 217 222
C.G. Salamon, C. Lewis, J. Priestley, E. Gurshumov, and P.J. Culligan Prospective study of an ultra-lightweight polypropylene Y mesh for robotic sacrocolpopexy Int Urogynecol J 24 2013 1371 1375
J. Leruth, M. Fillet, and D. Waltregny Incidence and risk factors of postoperative stress urinary incontinence following laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in patients with negative preoperative prolapse reduction stress testing Int Urogynecol J 24 2013 485 491
J.W. Ross, and M. Preston Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for severe vaginal vault prolapse: five-year outcome J Minim Invasive Gynecol 12 2005 221 226
F. Rozet, E. Mandron, and C. Arroyo et al. Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy approach for genito-urinary prolapse: experience with 363 cases Eur Urol 47 2005 230 236
J. Moreno Sierra, E. Ortiz Oshiro, and C. Fernandez Perez et al. Long-term outcomes after robotic sacrocolpopexy in pelvic organ prolapse: prospective analysis Urol Int 86 2011 414 418
M. Belsante, S. Murray, B. Dillon, and P. Zimmern Mid term outcome of robotic mesh sacrocolpopexy Can J Urol 20 2013 6656 6661
A. Ploumidis, A.F. Spinoit, and G. De Naeyer et al. Robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: surgical technique and outcomes at a single high-volume institution Eur Urol 65 2014 138 145
K.C. Hsiao, K. Latchamsetty, F.E. Govier, P. Kozlowski, and K.C. Kobashi Comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse J Endourol 21 2007 926 930
R.M. Freeman, K. Pantazis, and A. Thomson et al. A randomised controlled trial of abdominal versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: LAS study Int Urogynecol J 24 2013 377 384
M.F. Paraiso, J.E. Jelovsek, A. Frick, C.C. Chen, and M.D. Barber Laparoscopic compared with robotic sacrocolpopexy for vaginal prolapse: a randomized controlled trial Obstet Gynecol 118 2011 1005 1013
J. Seror, D.R. Yates, E. Seringe, and C. Vaessen et al. Prospective comparison of short-term functional outcomes obtained after pure laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy World J Urol 30 2012 393 398
A.J. Wein, and D.F. Penson Re: Retropubic versus transobturator midurethral slings for stress incontinence J Urol 187 2012 202 204
A. Wattiez, M. Canis, G. Mage, J.L. Pouly, and M.A. Bruhat Promontofixation for the treatment of prolapse Urol Clin North Am 28 2001 151 157
E. Costantini, M. Lazzeri, V. Bini, M. Del Zingaro, A. Zucchi, and M. Porena Pelvic organ prolapse repair with and without prophylactic concomitant Burch colposuspension in continent women: a randomized, controlled trial with 8-year followup J Urol 185 2011 2236 2240
A. van der Steen, M. van der Ploeg, M.G. Dijkgraaf, H. van der Vaart, and J.P. Roovers Protocol for the CUPIDO trials; multicenter randomized controlled trials to assess the value of combining prolapse surgery and incontinence surgery in patients with genital prolapse and evident stress incontinence (CUPIDO I) and in patients with genital prolapse and occult stress incontinence (CUPIDO II) BMC Womens Health 10 2010 16
P. Gadonneix, A. Ercoli, G. Scambia, and R. Villet The use of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the management of pelvic organ prolapse Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 17 2005 376 380
C.F. Maher, M.P. Carey, and C.J. Murray Laparoscopic suture hysteropexy for uterine prolapse Obstet Gynecol 97 2001 1010 1014
C.H. Nezhat, F. Nezhat, and C. Nezhat Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse Obstet Gynecol 84 1994 885 888
D. Sarlos, S. Brandner, L. Kots, N. Gygax, and G. Schaer Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for uterine and post-hysterectomy prolapse: anatomical results, quality of life and perioperative outcome - a prospective study with 101 cases Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19 2008 1415 1422
D.S. Di Marco, G.K. Chow, M.T. Gettman, and D.S. Elliott Robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for treatment of vaginal vault prolapse Urology 63 2004 373 376
A. Germain, F. Thibault, and M. Galifet et al. Long-term outcomes after totally robotic sacrocolpopexy for treatment of pelvic organ prolapse Surg Endosc 27 2013 525 529
J.P. Lenihan Jr., C. Kovanda, and U. Seshadri-Kreaden What is the learning curve for robotic assisted gynecologic surgery? J Minim Invasive Gynecol 15 2008 589 594
Rahmanou P, White B, Price N, Jackson S. Laparoscopic hysteropexy: 1- to 4-year follow-up of women postoperatively. Int Urogynecol J. In press.
P. Gadonneix, A. Ercoli, and D. Salet-Lizee 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 11 2004 29 35
D.S. Elliott, A.E. Krambeck, and G.K. Chow Long-term results of robotic assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of high grade vaginal vault prolapse J Urol 176 2006 655 659
D. Vitobello, G. Siesto, and C. Bulletti Robotic sacral hysteropexy for pelvic organ prolapse Int J Med Robot 8 2012 114 117
J.L. Klauschie, B.A. Suozzi, M.M. O'Brien, and A.W. McBride A comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal sacral colpopexy: objective outcome and perioperative differences Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 20 2009 273 279
N. Awad, S. Mustafa, A. Amit, M. Deutsch, J. Eldor-Itskovitz, and L. Lowenstein Implementation of a new procedure: laparoscopic versus robotic sacrocolpopexy Arch Gynecol Obstet 287 2013 1181 1186
S.A. Collins, P.K. Tulikangas, and D.M. O'Sullivan Effect of surgical approach on physical activity and pain control after sacral colpopexy Am J Obst Gynecol 206 2012 438 e1-6
E.J. Geller, N.Y. Siddiqui, J.M. Wu, and A.G. Visco Short-term outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy compared with abdominal sacrocolpopexy Obstet Gynecol 112 2008 1201 1206
N.Y. Siddiqui, E.J. Geller, and A.G. Visco Symptomatic and anatomic 1-year outcomes after robotic and abdominal sacrocolpopexy Am J Obstet Gynecol 206 2012 435 e1-5
G.W. Cundiff, E. Varner, and A.G. Visco et al. Risk factors for mesh/suture erosion following sacral colpopexy Am J Obstet Gynecol 199 2008 688 e1-5
J. Tan-Kim, S.A. Menefee, K.M. Luber, C.W. Nager, and E.S. Lukacz Prevalence and risk factors for mesh erosion after laparoscopic-assisted sacrocolpopexy Int Urogynecol J 22 2011 205 212
B.C. Osmundsen, A. Clark, and C. Goldsmith et al. Mesh erosion in robotic sacrocolpopexy Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 18 2012 86 88
R. Granese, M. Candiani, A. Perino, F. Romano, and G. Cucinella Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse: 8 years experience Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 146 2009 227 231
N. Price, A. Slack, and S.R. Jackson Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: an observational study of functional and anatomical outcomes Int Urogynecol J 22 2011 77 82
H.E. Richter, M.E. Albo, and H.M. Zyczynski et al. Retropubic versus transobturator midurethral slings for stress incontinence N Engl J Med 362 2010 2066 2076
J.P. Judd, N.Y. Siddiqui, J.C. Barnett, A.G. Visco, L.J. Havrilesky, and J.M. Wu Cost-minimization analysis of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal sacrocolpopexy J Minim Invasive Gynecol 17 2010 493 499
J. Tan-Kim, S.A. Menefee, K.M. Luber, C.W. Nager, and E.S. Lukacz Robotic-assisted and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: comparing operative times, costs and outcomes Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 17 2011 44 49
C.S. Elliott, M.H. Hsieh, E.R. Sokol, C.V. Comiter, C.K. Payne, and B. Chen Robot-assisted versus open sacrocolpopexy: a cost-minimization analysis J Urol 187 2012 638 643
E.R. Mueller, K. Kenton, and C. Tarnay et al. Abdominal Colpopexy: Comparison of Endoscopic Surgical Strategies (ACCESS) Contemp Clin Trials 33 2012 1011 1018