Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Anatomic and functional outcomes of sacrocolpopexy with or without posterior colporrhaphy

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The optimal surgery for combined apical and posterior vaginal prolapse is not well defined. Our objective was to examine the anatomic and functional outcomes following sacrocolpopexy (SCP) with or without posterior colporrhaphy (PC).

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated 258 women who underwent abdominal (n = 62) or laparoscopic (n = 196) SCP with or without PC. Preoperative anatomic support and standardized bowel symptoms were compared to 6-week and 1-year postoperative values, using Student’s t test and Wilcoxon rank sum test, respectively.

Results

Six-week follow-up data were available for 235 of 258 (91.1 %) women, while 125 of 258 (48.4 %) women had 1-year anatomic and functional outcomes recorded. While the SCP + PC group had worse posterior descent and bowel function preoperatively, there were no significant differences in postoperative anatomic support or symptoms. Long-term pelvic floor function was similar, as measured by three validated instruments. Reduction in the proportion of women with splinting was greater in the SCP + PC group.

Conclusions

SCP with or without PC is associated with improved posterior support and decreased obstructive and irritative bowel symptoms at 1 year in women with apical and posterior prolapse.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Paraiso MFR, Barber MD, Muir TW, Walters MD (2006) Rectocele repair: a randomized trial of three surgical techniques including graft augmentation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 195:1762–1771

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Addison WA, Cundiff GW, Bump RC, Harris RL (1996) Sacral colpopexy is the preferred treatment for vaginal vault prolapse. J Gynecol Technol 2:69–74

    Google Scholar 

  3. Yau JL, Rahn DD, McIntire DD, Schaffer JI, Wai CY (2007) The natural history of posterior vaginal wall support after abdominal sacrocolpopexy with and without posterior colporrhaphy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 196:e45–e47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Baessler K, Schuessler B (2001) Abdominal sacrocolpopexy and anatomy and function of the posterior compartment. Obstet Gynecol 97:678–684

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Cundiff GW, Harris RL, Coates K, Low VHS, Bump RC, Addison WA (1997) Abdominal sacral colpoperineopexy: a new approach for correction of posterior compartment defects and perineal descent associated with vaginal vault prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 177:1345–1355

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L et al (2004) Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol 104:805–823

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kahn MA, Stanton SL (1997) Posterior colporrhaphy: its effects on bowel and sexual function. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 104:82–86

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gustilo-Ashby AM, Paraiso MFR, Jelovsek JE, Walters MD, Barber MD (2007) Bowel symptoms 1 year after surgery for prolapse: further analysis of a randomized trial of rectocele repair. Am J Obstet Gynecol 197:e1–e5, 76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cundiff GW, Fenner D (2004) Evaluation and treatment of women with rectocele: focus on associated defecatory and sexual dysfunction. Obstet Gynecol 104:1403–1420

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Weber AM, Walters MD, Piedmonte MA (2000) Sexual function and vaginal anatomy in women before and after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 182:1610–1615

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bradley CS, Nygaard IE, Brown MB et al (2007) Bowel symptoms in women 1 year after sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 197:642.e1–e8, 642

    Google Scholar 

  12. Uebersax JS, Wyman JF, Shumaker SA, McClish DK, Fantl JA (1995) Short forms to assess life quality and symptom distress for urinary incontinence in women: the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire and the Urogenital Distress Inventory. Continence Program for Women Research Group. Neurourol Urodyn 14:131–139

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Rogers RG, Coates KW, Kammerer-Doak D, Khalsa S, Qualls C (2003) A short form of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12). Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 14:164–168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Hitchcock Foundation (Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center) provided financial support.

Conflicts of interest

Kris Strohbehn, M.D.: Society for Gynecologic Surgeons, Director of Post-Graduate Medicine, Executive Committee

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel J. Kaser.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kaser, D.J., Kinsler, E.L., Mackenzie, T.A. et al. Anatomic and functional outcomes of sacrocolpopexy with or without posterior colporrhaphy. Int Urogynecol J 23, 1215–1220 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-1695-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-1695-1

Keywords

Navigation