Advertisement

Minimally Invasive Approach in Urogynecology: An Evidence-Based Approach

  • Tatiana Pfiffer Favero
  • Kaven Baessler
Chapter

Abstract

Pelvic organ prolapse is a common condition that affects 15–30% of parous women. There are several minimally invasive techniques, including vaginal and endoscopic procedures, to correct the multiple defects in the three pelvic anatomic compartments. Furthermore, hysterectomy, continence procedures and mesh applications can be performed using both approaches.

Keywords

pelvic organ prolapse minimally invasive surgery occult urinary incontinence 

References

  1. 1.
    Slieker-ten Hove MC, et al. The prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse symptoms and signs and their relation with bladder and bowel disorders in a general female population. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2009;20(9):1037–45.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Olsen AL, et al. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89(4):501–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gamal Mostafa Ghoniem, MD. Cystocele Repair. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1848220-overview.
  4. 4.
    Maher C, Baessler K. Surgical management of anterior vaginal wall prolapse: an evidence based literature review. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2006;17(2):195–201.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eilber KS, et al. Outcomes of vaginal prolapse surgery among female Medicare beneficiaries: the role of apical support. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(5):981–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    White GR. Cystocele. JAMA. 1909;853:1707–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen L, Ashton-Miller JA, DeLancey JO. A 3D finite element model of anterior vaginal wall support to evaluate mechanisms underlying cystocele formation. J Biomech. 2009;42(10):1371–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mallipeddi PK, et al. Anatomic and functional outcome of vaginal paravaginal repair in the correction of anterior vaginal wall prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2001;12(2):83–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Young SB, Daman JJ, Bony LG. Vaginal paravaginal repair: one-year outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185(6):1360–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Richardson AC, Lyon JB, Williams NL. A new look at pelvic relaxation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1976;126:568.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baessler et al. Diagnosis and Therapy of Female Pelvic Organ Prolapse. Guideline of the DGGG, SGGG and OEGGG (S2e-Level, AWMF Registry Number 015/006, April 2016). Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2016;76(12):1287–301. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-119648.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chinthakanan O, Miklos JR, Moore RD. Laparoscopic paravaginal defect repair: surgical technique and a literature review. Surg Technol Int. 2015;27:173–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shull BL, Baden WB. A six-year experience with paravaginal defect repair for stress urinary incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1989;160:1432–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maher C, et al. Transvaginal mesh or grafts compared with native tissue repair for vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;2:CD012079.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Maher C. Anterior vaginal compartment surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(11):1791–802.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Maher C, et al. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:CD004014.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wong V, et al. Is levator avulsion a predictor of cystocele recurrence following anterior vaginal mesh placement? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013;42(2):230–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wong V, et al. Cystocele recurrence after anterior colporrhaphy with and without mesh use. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;172:131–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Karram M, Maher C. Surgery for posterior vaginal wall prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(11):1835–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Weber AM, et al. Posterior vaginal prolapse and bowel function. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;179(6 Pt 1):1446–9; discussion 1449–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Siproudhis L, et al. Defecatory disorders, anorectal and pelvic floor dysfunction: a polygamy? Radiologic and manometric studies in 41 patients. Int J Color Dis. 1992;7(2):102–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Grimes CL, Lukacz ES. Posterior vaginal compartment prolapse and defecatory dysfunction: are they related? Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23(5):537–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Grimes CL, et al. Outcome measures to assess anatomy and function of the posterior vaginal compartment. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25(7):893–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Baessler K. Enterocele. In: Cardozo L, Staskin D, editors. Textbook of female urology and urogynecology. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2016. p. 942–53.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    DeLancey JO. Anatomic aspects of vaginal eversion after hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166(6 Pt 1):1717–24; discussion 1724–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    DeLancey JO. Structural anatomy of the posterior pelvic compartment as it relates to rectocele. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180(4):815–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kahn MA, Stanton SL. Posterior colporrhaphy: its effects on bowel and sexual function. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104(1):82–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Maher C, Baessler K. Surgical management of posterior vaginal wall prolapse: an evidence-based literature review. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2006;17(1):84–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Abramov Y, et al. Site-specific rectocele repair compared with standard posterior colporrhaphy. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105(2):314–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Baessler K, et al. Severe mesh complications following intravaginal slingplasty. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106(4):713–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Paraiso MF, et al. Rectocele repair: a randomized trial of three surgical techniques including graft augmentation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195(6):1762–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Villet R, et al. Abdominal approach of rectocele and colpocele. Ann Chir. 1993;47(7):626–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cundiff GW, et al. Abdominal sacral colpoperineopexy: a new approach for correction of posterior compartment defects and perineal descent associated with vaginal vault prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;177(6):1345–53; discussion 1353–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Baessler K, Schuessler B. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy and anatomy and function of the posterior compartment. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97(5 Pt 1):678–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Baessler K, Stanton SL. Sacrocolpopexy for vault prolapse and rectocele: do concomitant Burch colposuspension and perineal mesh detachment affect the outcome? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192(4):1067–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rooney K, et al. Advanced anterior vaginal wall prolapse is highly correlated with apical prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195(6):1837–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hsu Y, et al. Anterior vaginal wall length and degree of anterior compartment prolapse seen on dynamic MRI. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19(1):137–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sederl J. Surgery in prolapse of a blind-end vagina. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 1958;18(6):824–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Beer M, Kuhn A. Surgical techniques for vault prolapse: a review of the literature. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005;119(2):144–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Morgan DM, et al. Heterogeneity in anatomic outcome of sacrospinous ligament fixation for prolapse: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(6):1424–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Barber MD, et al. Comparison of 2 transvaginal surgical approaches and perioperative behavioral therapy for apical vaginal prolapse: the OPTIMAL randomized trial. JAMA. 2014;311(10):1023–34.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sze EH, Karram MM. Transvaginal repair of vault prolapse: a review. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89(3):466–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Shull BL, et al. A transvaginal approach to repair of apical and other associated sites of pelvic organ prolapse with uterosacral ligaments. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;183(6):1365–73; discussion 1373–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Barber MD, Maher C. Apical prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(11):1815–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Margulies RU, Rogers MA, Morgan DM. Outcomes of transvaginal uterosacral ligament suspension: systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(2):124–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Rardin CR, et al. Uterosacral colpopexy at the time of vaginal hysterectomy: comparison of laparoscopic and vaginal approaches. J Reprod Med. 2009;54(5):273–80.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Diwan A, et al. Laparoscopic uterosacral ligament uterine suspension compared with vaginal hysterectomy with vaginal vault suspension for uterovaginal prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2006;17(1):79–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gutman RE, et al. Vaginal and laparoscopic mesh hysteropexy for uterovaginal prolapse: a parallel cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Bedford ND, et al. Effect of uterine preservation on outcome of laparoscopic uterosacral suspension. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2013;20(2):172–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Lin LL, et al. A review of laparoscopic uterine suspension procedures for uterine preservation. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2005;17(5):541–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sturm P, Baessler K. Do technical differences during sacrocolpopexy affect the outcome? Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(Suppl 1):S88.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Deprest J, et al. Medium term outcome of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with xenografts compared to synthetic grafts. J Urol. 2009;182(5):2362–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Granese R, et al. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse: 8 years experience. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2009;146(2):227–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Maher C, et al. Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;10:CD012376.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Cundiff GW, et al. Risk factors for mesh/suture erosion following sacral colpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199(6):688.e1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Serati M, et al. Robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol. 2014;66(2):303–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Lin TY, et al. Risk factors for failure of transvaginal sacrospinous uterine suspension in the treatment of uterovaginal prolapse. J Formos Med Assoc. 2005;104(4):249–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Gutman R, Maher C. Uterine-preserving POP surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(11):1803–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Krause HG, et al. Laparoscopic sacral suture hysteropexy for uterine prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2006;17(4):378–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Maher CF, Carey MP, Murray CJ. Laparoscopic suture hysteropexy for uterine prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97(6):1010–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Uccella S, et al. Laparoscopic uterosacral ligaments plication for the treatment of uterine prolapse. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2007;276(3):225–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    FitzGerald MP, et al. Colpocleisis: a review. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2006;17(3):261–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Baessler K, Maher C. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery and bladder function. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(11):1843–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Maher C, Baessler K, Barber M, Cheon C, Consten E, Cooper K, Deffieux X, Dietz V, Gutman R, van Iersel J, Sung V, DeTayrac R. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery. ICI.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ellstrom Engh AM, et al. Can de novo stress incontinence after anterior wall repair be predicted? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010;90(5):488–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Colombo M, et al. Randomised comparison of Burch colposuspension versus anterior colporrhaphy in women with stress urinary incontinence and anterior vaginal wall prolapse. BJOG. 2000;107(4):544–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Nieminen K, et al. Outcomes after anterior vaginal wall repair with mesh: a randomized, controlled trial with a 3 year follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203(3):235.e1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    van der Ploeg JM, et al. Prolapse surgery with or without stress incontinence surgery for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. BJOG. 2014;121(5):537–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    van der Ploeg JM, et al. Vaginal prolapse repair with or without a midurethral sling in women with genital prolapse and occult stress urinary incontinence: a randomized trial. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(7):1029–38.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Borstad E, et al. Surgical strategies for women with pelvic organ prolapse and urinary stress incontinence. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21(2):179–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Costantini E, et al. Burch colposuspension does not provide any additional benefit to pelvic organ prolapse repair in patients with urinary incontinence: a randomized surgical trial. J Urol. 2008;180(3):1007–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Trabuco EC, et al. Burch retropubic urethropexy compared with midurethral sling with concurrent sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(4):828–35.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Matsuoka PK, et al. Should prophylactic anti-incontinence procedures be performed at the time of prolapse repair? Systematic review. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(2):187–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Abteilung für GynäkologieHelios Mariahilf Klinik HamburgHamburgGermany
  2. 2.Franziskus und St. Joseph KrankenhäuserBeckenbodenzentrumBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations