Uterine Preservation or Hysterectomy at Sacrospinous Colpopexy for Uterovaginal Prolapse?
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
This study retrospectively compared 34 women who had a sacrospinous hysteropexy and 36 who had a vaginal hysterectomy and sacrospinous fixation for symptomatic uterine prolapse. All women underwent independent review and examination, with a mean follow-up of 36 months in the hysterectomy group and 26 months in the hysteropexy group.
The subjective success rate was 86% in the hysterectomy group and 78% in the hysteropexy group (P = 0.70). The objective success rate was 72% and 74%, respectively (P = 1.00). The patient-determined satisfaction rate was 86% in the hysterectomy group and 85% in the hysteropexy group (P = 1.00). The operating time in the hysterectomy group was 91 minutes, compared to 59 minutes in the hysteropexy group (P<0.01). The mean intraoperative blood loss in the hysterectomy group was 402 ml, compared to 198 ml in the hysteropexy group (P<0.01). The sacrospinous hysteropexy is effective in the treatment of uterine prolapse. Vaginal hysterectomy may not be necessary in the surgical treatment of uterine prolapse.
- Uterine Preservation or Hysterectomy at Sacrospinous Colpopexy for Uterovaginal Prolapse?
International Urogynecology Journal
Volume 12, Issue 6 , pp 381-385
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Additional Links
- Key words:Hysterectomy – Sacrospinous hysteropexy – Uterine prolapse
- Industry Sectors