Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing laparoscopic and robotic sacrocolpopexy surgical outcomes with prior versus concomitant hysterectomy

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

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The objective was to compare surgical outcomes after prior hysterectomy versus concomitant hysterectomy with laparoscopic/robotic minimally invasive sacral colpopexy (MISC).

Methods

Using all MISC from 2009 to 2014, patient sociodemographic and surgical data were compared between MISC with prior versus concomitant hysterectomy. Operative time (skin incision to closure) was compared with linear regression. Logistic regression compared complications, a composite variable including ≥1 transfusion, infection, readmission, reoperation, bowel obstruction/ileus, conversion to laparotomy, bowel/bladder injury, or mesh complication. Logistic regression compared prolapse recurrence defined as retreatment (pessary/surgery) or postoperative POP-Q points ≥ 0.

Results

Eight hundred and sixteen patients were 59.6 ± 8.7 years old and predominantly Caucasians (97.8%), with BMI 27.4 ± 4.5 and predominantly POP-Q stage III prolapse (69.9%). Operative time was 205.0 ± 69.0 min. Concomitant hysterectomy increased operative time 17.8 min (p = 0.004) adjusting for age, POP-Q stage, total vaginal length, perineal body, lysis of adhesions or perineorrhaphy, changes in operating personnel (scrub tech/circulating nurse), case order during the day, and preoperative stress incontinence. Complications occurred in 15.8% and were more likely with prior hysterectomy (odds ratio [OR] = 2.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.43-3.70) adjusting for preoperative genital hiatus and perineal body, concomitant midurethral sling, obesity, and immunosuppression. During a follow-up of 31 weeks, 7.8% had prolapse recurrence with no impact from concomitant hysterectomy (OR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.41-2.24). Post-hoc power calculation would have required an unattainable size of >2,800 per group for this outcome.

Conclusions

For MISC, concomitant hysterectomy is associated with longer operative time but lower risk of complications. There was no impact of concomitant hysterectomy on prolapse recurrence, but longer follow-up may be needed for this outcome.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. FDA. Urogynecologic surgical mesh: update on the safety and effectiveness of transvaginal mesh placement for pelvic organ prolapse. US Food and Drug Administration; 2011. Accessed 20 March 2017.

  2. Wu JM, Matthews CA, Conover MM, Pate V, Jonsson Funk M. Lifetime risk of stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:1201–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Nygaard I, Brubaker L, Zyczynski HM, Cundiff G, Richter H, Gantz M, et al. Long-term outcomes following abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. JAMA. 2013;309:2016–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Rosati M, Bramante S, Conti F. A review on the role of laparoscopic sacrocervicopexy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2014;26:281–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Campbell P, Cloney L, Jha S. Abdominal versus laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2016;71:435–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. O'Hanlan KA, Dibble SL, Garnier AC, Reuland ML. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy: technique and complications of 830 cases. JSLS. 2007;11:45–53.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Ismail SI, Emery SJ. Patient awareness and acceptability of antenatal perineal massage. J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;33:8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ismail SI. Recurrent prolapse after sacrocolpopexy for post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse. J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;27:292–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Dallas K, Elliott CS, Syan R, Sohlberg E, Enemchukwu E, Rogo-Gupta L. Association between concomitant hysterectomy and repeat surgery for pelvic organ prolapse repair in a cohort of nearly 100,000 women. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132:1328–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Geller EJ, Siddiqui NY, Wu JM, et al. Short-term outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy compared with abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112:1201–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Stepp KJ, Barber MD, Yoo EH, et al. Incidence of perioperative complications of urogynecologic surgery in elderly women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:1630–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Liss MA, Skarecky D, Morales B, et al. Preventing perioperative complications of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2013;81:319–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Turner LC, Kantartzis K, Lowder JL, Shepherd JP. The effect of age on complications in women undergoing minimally invasive sacral colpopexy. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25:1251–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Barber MD, Brubaker L, Burgio KL, Richter HE, Nygaard I, Weidner AC, et al. Comparison of 2 transvaginal surgical approaches and perioperative behavioral therapy for apical vaginal prolapse: the OPTIMAL randomized trial. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. JAMA. 2014;12(311):1023–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Nager CW, Zyczynski H, Rogers RG, Barber MD, Richter HE, Visco AG, et al. The design of randomized trial of vaginal surgery for uterovaginal prolapse: vaginal hysterectomy with native tissue vault suspension versus mesh hysteropexy suspension (the study of uterine prolapse procedures randomized trial). Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2016;22:182–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Giugale LE, Sears S, Lavelle ES, Carter-Brooks CM, Bonidie M, Shepherd JP. Evaluating the impact of intraoperative surgical team handoffs on patient outcomes. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2017;23:288–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lavelle ES, Turner LC, Shepherd JP. Impact of case order on laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: do surgeons need a warm-up? Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2017;23:272–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Vandendriessche D, Sussfeld J, Giraudet G, Lucot JP, Behal H, Cosson M. Complications and reoperations after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with a mean follow-up of 4 years. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28:231–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Richter HE, Albo ME, Zyczynski HM, Kenton K, Norton PA, Sirls LT, et al. Urinary incontinence treatment network. Retropubic versus transobturator midurethral slings for stress incontinence. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:2066–76.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Rogers RG, Nolen TL, Weidner AC, Richter HE, Jelovsek JE, Shepherd JP, et al. Surgical outcomes after apical repair for vault compared with uterovaginal prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131:475–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Culligan PJ, Murphy M, Blackwell L, Hammons G, Graham C, Heit MH. Long-term success of abdominal sacral colpopexy using synthetic mesh. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187:1473–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Trinity Health Of New England , Hartford, CT, USA

    Alexandra Dubinskaya, Diego Hernandez-Aranda, Dorothy B. Wakefield & Jonathan P. Shepherd

  2. University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT, USA

    Dorothy B. Wakefield

Authors
  1. Alexandra Dubinskaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Diego Hernandez-Aranda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dorothy B. Wakefield
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jonathan P. Shepherd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan P. Shepherd.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dubinskaya, A., Hernandez-Aranda, D., Wakefield, D.B. et al. Comparing laparoscopic and robotic sacrocolpopexy surgical outcomes with prior versus concomitant hysterectomy. Int Urogynecol J 31, 401–407 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-04017-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-04017-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation