Comparative characteristics of laparoscopic sacrovaginopexy and transvaginal sacrospinous fixation

Close metadata

Recommended articles:

Laparoscopic methods of treatment of patients with pelvic organ prolapse. Russian Bulletin of Obstetrician-Gynecologist. 2024;(3):55-59

Relapses after surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse in women with connective tissue dysplasia. Russian Bulletin of Obstetrician-Gynecologist. 2025;(2):93-97

Non-drug technologies in rehabilitation of women after rectocele repair. Regenerative Biotechnologies, Preventive, Digital and Predictive Medicine. 2024;(4):82-89

Possibilities surgical treatment of atypical forms of pelvic organ prolapse. Endoscopic Surgery. 2025;(2):35-42

The authors analyze the works published in the last 5 years concerning the problem of surgical treatment of patients with pelvic organ prolapse of the II stage and more according to the POP-Q classification. Advantages and disadvantages of the most frequently used surgeries, such as laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and transvaginal sacroiliac fixation, are analyzed. However, the effectiveness, frequency of recurrences, defecation disorders, mesh-associated complications etc. are unknown. The problem of surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse needs further investigation. At present, the choice of surgical technique should be based on the studied results, using an individual approach in each case.

Keywords:

transvaginal sacroiliac fixation

laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy

pelvic organ prolapse

Authors:

Petrenko O.A.

N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

ORCID: 0000-0003-1128-5593

Petrenko N.A.

N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

ORCID: 0000-0003-2663-1575

Bakhtiyarov K.R.

I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State University (Sechenov University)

ORCID: 0000-0001-7114-4050

Received:

24.01.2023

Accepted:

21.02.2023

List of references:

Weintraub AY, Glinter H, Marcus-Braun N. Narrative review of the epidemiology, diagnosis and pathophysiology of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Braz J Urol. 2020;46:1:5-14. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2018.0581
Gillor M, Saens P, Dietz HP. Demographic risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse: Do smoking, asthma, heavy lifting or family history matter? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021;261:25-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.04.006
Mou T, Warner K, Brown O, Yeh C, Beestrum M, Kenton K, Emi Bretschneider C. Prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse among US racial populations: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of population‐based screening studies. Neurourol Urodynam. 2021;40:5:1098-1106. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.24672
Schulten SFM, Claas-Quax MJ, Weemhoff M, van Eijndhoven HW, van Leijsen SA, Vergeldt TF, IntHout J, Kluivers KB. Risk factors for primary pelvic organ prolapse and prolapse recurrence: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;227:2:192-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2022.04.046
Gluck O, Blaganje M, Veit-Rubin N, Phillips C, Deprest J, O’reilly B, But I, Moore R, Jeffery S, Haddad JM, Deval B. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: A comprehensive literature review on current practice. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2020;245:94-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.12.029
Developed by the Joint Writing Group of the American Urogynecologic Society and the International Urogynecological Association. Joint report on terminology for surgical procedures to treat pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31:3:429-463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-020-04236-1
Lua LL, Vicente ED, Pathak P, Lybbert D, Dandolu V. Comparative analysis of overall cost and rate of healthcare utilization among apical prolapse procedures. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28:10:1481-1488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3324-5
Brunes M, Ek M, Drca A, Söderberg M, Bergman I, Warnqvist A, Johannesson U. Vaginal vault prolapse and recurrent surgery: A nationwide observational cohort study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2022;101:5:542-549. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.14341
Zhang W, Cheon WC, Zhang L, Wang X, Wei Y, Lyu C. Comparison of the effectiveness of sacrospinous ligament fixation and sacrocolpopexy: a meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33:1:3-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-021-04823-w
van Oudheusden AMJ, Coolen AWM, Hoskam H, Veen J, Bongers MY. Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy versus vaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy as treatment for uterine descent: comparison of long-term outcomes. Int Urogynecol J. 2023;34:1:211-223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-022-05185-7
Biler A, Ertaş İE, Tosun G, Hortu İ, Demir A, Taner CE. Perioperative complications and short-term outcomes of abdominal sacrocolpopexy, laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy, sacrospinous ligament fixation, and iliococcygeus fixation procedures. Turkish J Med Scie. 2018;14;48:3:602-610. https://doi.org/10.3906/sag-1712-203
Daneshpajooh A, Pakmanesh H, Sohbati S, Mirzaei M, Zemanati E, Dehesh T. Comparing laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with vaginal sacrospinous ligament fixation in the treatment of vaginal apical prolapse; the first randomized clinical trial: A pilot study. Urol J. 2022;19:131-137. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35094377
Wang K, Shi L, Huang Z, Xu Y. Bilateral sacrospinous hysteropexy versus bilateral sacrospinous ligament fixation with vaginal hysterectomy for apical uterovaginal prolapse. I Int Urogynecol J. 2022;26:3:239-247. https://doi.org/10.5213/inj.2244076.038
Kapoor S, Sivanesan K, Robertson JA, Veerasingham M, Kapoor V. Sacrospinous hysteropexy: review and meta-analysis of outcomes. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28:9:1285-1294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3291-x
Naumann G, Börner C, Naumann LJ, Schröder S, Hüsch T. A novel bilateral anterior sacrospinous hysteropexy technique for apical pelvic organ prolapse repair via the vaginal route: a cohort study. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2022;306:1:141-149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-022-06486-4
Shkapura DD, Bezmenko AA, Kubin ND, Shapovalova KA, Pisarev AV. Vaginal vault reconstruction and apical sling in the treatment of post-hysterectomy prolaps. Zhurnal akusherstva i zhenskikh boleznei. 2017;66:1:46-55. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17816/jowd66146-55
Delacroix C, Allegre L, Chatziioannidou K, Gérard A, Fatton B, de Tayrac R. Anterior bilateral sacrospinous ligament fixation with concomitant anterior native tissue repair: a pilot study. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33:12:3519-3527. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-022-05092-x
Rostaminia G, Abramowitch S, Chang C, Goldberg RP. The role of conventional pelvic floor reconstructive surgeries in obstructed defecation symptoms change: CARE and OPTIMAL trials sub-analysis of 2-year follow-up data. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31:7:1325-1334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-04190-7
Hu P, Zhong C, Lu S, Lei L, Wang Y, Liu L. Safety and efficiency of modified sacrospinous ligament fixation for apical prolapse: Long‐term studies and outcomes. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2022;156:566-572. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.13786
van IJsselmuiden MN, van Oudheusden A, Veen J, van de Pol G, Vollebregt A, Radder CM, Housmans S, van Kuijk S, Deprest J, Bongers MY, van Eijndhoven H. Hysteropexy in the treatment of uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy versus sacrospinous hysteropexy — a multicentre randomised controlled trial (LAVA trial). BJOG: Int J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;127:10:1284-1293. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.16242
Geoffrion R, Larouche M. Guideline No. 413: Surgical management of apical pelvic organ prolapse in women. J Obstet Gynaecol Canada. 2021;43:511-523.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2021.02.001
Meriwether KV, Antosh DD, Olivera CK, Kim-Fine S, Balk EM, Murphy M, Grimes CL, Sleemi A, Singh R, Dieter AA, Crisp CC, Rahn DD. Uterine preservation vs hysterectomy in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis and clinical practice guidelines. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;219:2:129-146.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2018.01.018
Oh S, Jeon MJ. How and on whom to perform uterine-preserving surgery for uterine prolapse. Obstet Gynecol Scie. 2022;65:317-324. https://doi.org/10.5468/ogs.22003
Plair A, Dutta R, Overholt TL, Matthews C. Short-term outcomes of sacrospinous hysteropexy through an anterior approach. Int Urogynecol J. 2021;32:1555-1563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-020-04641-6
Coolen AWM, van IJsselmuiden MN, van Oudheusden AMJ, Veen J, van Eijndhoven HWF, Mol BWJ, Roovers JP, Bongers MY. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus vaginal sacrospinous fixation for vaginal vault prolapse, a randomized controlled trial: SALTO-2 trial, study protocol. BMC women’s health 2017;17:1:52. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-017-0402-2
Vasin RV, Filimonov VB, Vasina IV. Genital prolapse: modern aspects of surgical treatment (literature review). Eksperimental′naya i klinicheskaya urologiya. 2017;1:104-115. (In Russ.). https://readera.org/142188165
Kurbanov BB. Comparative evaluation of the effectiveness of surgical treatment of genital prolapse. Vestnik Natsional′nogo mediko-khirurgicheskogo tsentra im. N.I. Pirogova. 2018;13:2:84-87. (In Russ.). https://www.dissercat.com/content/sovremennye-podkhody-k-diagnostike-i-khirurgicheskomu-lecheniyu-prolapsov-genitalii-u-mnogo-0
Bohlin KS, Ankardal M, Lindkvist H, Milsom I. Factors influencing the incidence and remission of urinary incontinence after hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216:1:53.e1-53.e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2016.08.034
Pålsson M, Stjerndahl JH, Granåsen G, Löfgren M, Sundfeldt K. Patient-reported lower urinary tract symptoms after hysterectomy or hysteroscopy: a study from the Swedish Quality Register for Gynecological Surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28:9:1341-1349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3268-9
Eto C, Ford AT, Smith M, Advolodkina P, Northington GM. Retrospective Cohort Study on the Perioperative Risk Factors for Transient Voiding Dysfunction After Apical Prolapse Repair: Female Pelvic Med Reconstruct Surg. 2019;25:2:167-171. https://doi.org/10.1097/spv.0000000000000675
Juliato CRT, Santos-Junior LC, de Castro EB, Dertkigil SS, Brito LGO. Vaginal axis after abdominal sacrocolpopexy versus vaginal sacrospinous fixation—a randomized trial. Neurourol Urodynam. 2019;38:4:1142-1151. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23970
Van IJsselmuiden MN, Lecomte-Grosbras P, Witz JF, Brieu M, Cosson M, van Eijndhoven HWF. Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging to quantify pelvic organ mobility after treatment for uterine descent: differences between surgical procedures. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31:10:2119-2127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-020-04278-5
Podzolkova NM, Glazkova OL, Kuznetsov RE, Sozaeva LG, Ignatchenko OYu, Lazareva VS. A differential approach to management of apical defect in pelvic floor dysfunction in women. Voprosy ginekologii, akusherstva i perinatologii. 2017;16:3:31-36. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.20953/1726-1678-2017-3-31-36
Okcu NT, Gürbüz T, Uysal G. Comparison of patients undergoing vaginal hysterectomy with sacrospinous ligament fixation, laparoscopic hysterectomy with sacrocolpopexy and abdominal hysterectomy with sacrocolpopexy in terms of postoperative quality of life and sexual function. J Gynecol Obstet Human Reprod. 2021;50:4:101977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogoh.2020.101977
Antosh DD, Kim-Fine S, Meriwether KV, Kanter G, Dieter AA, Mamik MM, Good M, Singh R, Alas A, Foda MA, Balk EM, Rahn DD, Rogers RG. Changes in sexual activity and function after pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;136:5:922-931. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000004125
Hamdy MA, Ahmed WAS, Abolill ZM, Elshahat AM, Taha OT. Female sexual function after repair of uterovaginal prolapse. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2022;48:12:3286-3291. https://doi.org/10.1111/jog.15414
Rogers RG, Meyer I, Smith AL, Ackenbom M, Barden L, Korbly N, Mazloomdoost D, Thomas S, Nager C. Improved body image after uterovaginal prolapse surgery with or without hysterectomy. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33:1:115-122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-021-04954-0
Dunivan GC, Sussman AL, Jelovsek JE, Sung V, Andy UU, Ballard A, Jakus-Waldman S, Amundsen CL, Chermansky CJ, Bann CM, Mazloomdoost D, Rogers RG. Gaining the patient perspective on pelvic floor disorders’ surgical adverse events. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;220:2:185.e1-185.e10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2018.10.033
Gustovarova TA, Kirakosyan LS, Feramuzova EE. Postoperative observations in genital prolapse surgery. Kubanskii nauchnyi meditsinskii vestnik. 2021;28:1:43-52. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.25207/1608-6228-2021-28-1-43-52
Rybnikov VN, Rybalko YaV, Korosteleva ES, Rybalko ES, Rybalko AV, Ponomareva LA. Experience in using high-tech and technically complex operations in gynecology in the Kursk city clinical maternity hospital. Zhenskoe zdorov′e i reproduktsiya. 2019;35:4:4. (In Russ.). https://whfordoctors.su/statyi/opyt-ispolzovanija-vysokotehnol
Strizhakov AN, Davydov AI, Belotserkovtseva LD. Back to basics: FDA reclassifies the use of MESH technologies. Voprosy ginekologii, akusherstva i perinatologii. 2017;16:3:47-50. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.20953/1726-1678-2017-3-47-50
Baines G, Price N, Jefferis H, Cartwright R, Jackson SR. Mesh-related complications of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J. 2019;30:9:1475-1481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-03952-7
Tarabanova OV, Melkon′yants TG, Ordokova AA, Sokolova EI, Kravtsova NA, Kravtsov II, Efimenko AV. Mesh-associated postoperative complications during the installation of synthetic mesh implants by trocar and anchor techniques. Kubanskii nauchnyi meditsinskii vestnik. 2018;25:1:34-39. (In Russ.). https://ksma.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/1002/0
Ishchenko AI, Ishchenko AA, Khokhlova ID, Dzhibladze TA, Gorbenko OYu, Asambaeva A. Promontofixation using a titanium implant in patients with polyvalent allergy and combined gynecological pathology. Voprosy ginekologii, akusherstva i perinatologii. 2021;20:4:170-173. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.20953/1726-1678-2021-4-170-173
Jeon MJ. Surgical decision making for symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse: evidence-based approach. Obstet Gynecol Scie. 2019;62:5:307-312. https://doi.org/10.5468/ogs.2019.62.5.307

Close metadata