Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Vaginal sacrocolporectopexy for the surgical treatment of uterine and vaginal vault prolapses: confirmation of the surgical method and perioperative results of 101 cases

  • General Gynecology
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

In this study, we sought to confirm the surgical method of vaginal sacrocolporectopexy and previously reported positive perioperative results of this procedure in a large patient group. We describe the approach which offers a vaginal, safe alternative to sacrospinous repair, laparoscopic or open vaginosacropexy and the use of synthetic meshes to treat pelvic organ prolapse.

Methods

We conducted a monocentric, prospective, nonrandomized study for treatment of patients with uterine and vaginal vault relapse (grade 2–4). All patients underwent a preoperative urogynecological urodynamic examination. We focus on method, operative time, complications, blood transfusions, hospital stay and clinical data.

Results

Between March 2006 and March 2011, 101 consecutive patients of mean age 64 (40–89) years, with sub or total uterine prolapse (n = 69, grade 2–4) and vaginal vault prolapse (n = 32, grade 2–4) were treated with vaginal sacrocolporectopexy. Cystocele (grade 2–4) was found in 88 (87.1 %) and rectocele (grade 2–4) in 43 (42.5 %) patients. Mean duration of surgery with sacrocolporectopexy was 70 min (28–165) without hysterectomy, and 76 min (40–219) with hysterectomy. Regression analysis of all patients (n = 101) showed a significant decrease of operative time in the group without hysterectomy after 40 cases. Three bladder lesions, two in patients with a history of hysterectomy, occurred during surgery and were corrected intraoperatively without further complications. No patient required a blood transfusion. Hemoglobin levels decreased slightly from a preoperative mean of 13.6 mg/dl (10.3–15.7) to a postoperative mean of 11.7 mg/dl (8.6–14.7).

Conclusion

Vaginal sacrocolporectopexy is a safe vaginal method for the treatment of sub-/total uterine/vaginal vault prolapse.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, Connolly A, Cundiff G, Weber AM, Zyczynski H, Pelvic Floor Disorders Network (2004) Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol 104(4):805–823

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Beer M, Kuhn A (2005) Surgical techniques for vault prolapse: a review of the literature. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 119(2):144–155

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Roovers JP, van der Bom JG, van der Vaart CH, van Leeuwen JH, Scholten PC, Heintz AP (2005) A randomized comparison of post-operative pain, quality of life, and physical performance during the first 6 weeks after abdominal or vaginal surgical correction of descensus uteri. Neurourol Urodyn 24(4):334–340

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hsiao KC, Latchamsetty K, Govier FE, Kozlowski P, Kobashi KC (2007) Comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. J Endourol 21:926–930

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Salvatores M, Pellegrini P, Botchorishvili R, Canis M, Pouly JL, Mage G, Wattiez A (2006) Laparoscopic promontal fixation: assessment of 100 cases. Minerva Ginecol 58:405–410

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Banerjee C, Noé KG (2008) Laparoscopic sacropexy—an underestimated method of vaginal vault surgery. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 68:492–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Banerjee C, Leufgen H, Hatzmann W, Noé G (2010) Complications, re-prolapse rates and functional results after laparoscopic sacropexy: a cohort study. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 70:379–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Volz J, Strittmatter E, Volz E, Wischnik A, Melchert F (1993) Die pelviskopische Sakropexie zur Therapie des Vaginalprolapses. Geburtsh u Frauenheilk 53:705–708

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Zempel W, Gösling A, Hillemanns P, Hertel H (2010) Successful pregnancy after laparoscopic uterosacropexy in a young woman with total uterine prolapse. Arch Gynecol Obstet 282(Suppl 1):66 (abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Baumann M, Salvisberg C, Mueller M, Kuhn A (2009) Sexual function after sacrospinous fixation for vaginal vault prolapse: bad or mad? Surg Endosc 23(5):1013–1017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. de Tayrac R, Devoldere G, Renaudie J, Villard P, Guilbaud O, Eglin G (2007) Prolapse repair by vaginal route using a new protected low-weight polypropylene mesh: 1-year functional and anatomical outcome in a prospective multicentre study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18:251–256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. de Tayrac R, Deffieux X, Gervaise A, Chauveaud-Lambling A, Fernandez H (2006) Long-term anatomical and functional assessment of trans-vaginal cystocele repair using a tension-free polypropylene mesh. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 17:483–488

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Benhaim Y, de Tayrac R, Deffieux X, Gervaise A, Chauveaud-Lambling A, Frydman R, Fernandez H (2006) Treatment of genital prolapse with a polypropylene mesh inserted via the vaginal route. Anatomic and functional outcome in women aged less than 50 years. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 35:219–226

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Abramov Y, Gandhi S, Goldberg RP, Botros SM, Kwon C, Sand PK (2005) Site-specific rectocele repair compared with standard posterior colporrhaphy. Obstet Gynecol 105:314–318

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Amrute KV, Eisenberg ER, Rastinehad AR, Kushner L, Badlani GH (2007) Analysis of outcomes of single polypropylene mesh in total pelvic floor reconstruction. Neurourol Urodyn 26:53–58

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Baessler K, Hewson AD, Tunn R, Schuessler B, Maher CF (2005) Severe mesh complications following intravaginal slingplasty. Obstet Gynecol 106:713–716

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Deffieux X, de Tayrac R, Huel C, Bottero J, Gervaise A, Bonnet K, Frydman R, Fernandez H (2007) Vaginal mesh erosion after transvaginal repair of cystocele using Gynemesh or Gynemesh-Soft in 138 women: a comparative study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18:73–79

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Foulques H (2007) Tolerance of mesh reinforcement inserted through vaginal approach for the cure of genital prolapses. A 317 continuous case study. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 36(7):653–659

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Hefni M, Yousri N, El-Toukhy T, Koutromanis P, Mossa M, Davies A (2007) Morbidity associated with posterior intravaginal slingplasty for uterovaginal and vault prolapse. Arch Gynecol Obstet 276:499–504

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Lim YN, Muller R, Corstiaans A, Hitchins S, Barry C, Rane A (2007) A long-term review of posterior colporrhaphy with Vypro 2 mesh. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18:1053–1057

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Maher C, Baessler K, Glazener CM, Adams EJ, Hagen S (2007) Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 14(4):CD004014

    Google Scholar 

  22. Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Glazener C (2011) Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women: the updated summary version. Cochrane review. Int Urogynecol J 22:1445–1457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kavallaris A, Köhler C, Diebolder H, Vercellino F, Krause N, Schneider A (2005) Repair of prolapse with vaginal sacrocolporectopexy: technique and results. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 122(2):237–242

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. von Lengerken J, Hildebrandt T, Diebolder H, Hillemanns P, Runnebaum IB, Hertel H (2006) Hohe Patientenzufriedenheit nach vaginaler Sakrokolporektopexie zur Prophylaxe oder Therapie des Scheidenstumpf-Descensus. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 67 (abstract)

  25. Hertel H, Kotsis S, Grüßner S, Hillemanns P (2010) Two-year follow up of 83 patients treated with vaginal sacrocolporectopexy for sub-/total uterine and vaginal vault prolapse. Arch Gynecol Obstet 282(1):58 (abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, Shull BL, Smith AR (1996) The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:10–17

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Ganatra AM, Rozet F, Sanchez-Salas R, Barret E, Galiano M, Cathelineau X, Vallancien G (2009) The current status of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a review. Eur Urol 55(5):1089–1103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. North CE, Ali-Ross NS, Smith AR, Reid FM (2009) A prospective study of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the management of pelvic organ prolapse. BJOG 16(9):1251–1257

    Google Scholar 

  29. Shiozawa T, Huebner M, Hirt B, Wallwiener D, Reisenauer C (2010) Nerve-preserving sacrocolpopexy: anatomical study and surgical approach. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 152(1):103–107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. de Vries MJ, van Dessel TH, Drogendijk AC, de Haas I, Huikeshoven FJ (1995) Short-term results and long-term patients’ appraisal of abdominal colposacropexy for treatment of genital and vaginal vault prolapse. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 59:35–38

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Cosson M, Rajabally R, Bogaert E, Querleu D, Crepin G (2002) Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy, hysterectomy, and burch colposuspension: feasibility and short-term complications of 77 procedures. JSLS 6:115–119

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Price N, Slack A, Jackson SR (2011) Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy an observational study of functional and anatomical outcomes. Int Urogynecol J 22:77–82

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Akladios CY, Dautun D, Saussine C, Baldauf JJ, Mathelin C, Wattiez A (2010) Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for female genital organ prolapse: establishment of a learning curve. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 149(2):218–221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clinic for Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of Hannover, Carl-Neubergstr. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany

    Hermann Hertel, Susanne Grüßner, Stylianos Kotsis & Peter Hillemanns

Authors
  1. Hermann Hertel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susanne Grüßner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stylianos Kotsis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Peter Hillemanns
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hermann Hertel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hertel, H., Grüßner, S., Kotsis, S. et al. Vaginal sacrocolporectopexy for the surgical treatment of uterine and vaginal vault prolapses: confirmation of the surgical method and perioperative results of 101 cases. Arch Gynecol Obstet 286, 1463–1471 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-012-2495-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-012-2495-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation