» Articles » PMID: 19201521

The Current Status of Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy: a Review

Overview
Journal Eur Urol
Specialty Urology
Date 2009 Feb 10
PMID 19201521
Citations 90
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Context: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common problem in women that causes morbidity and a decreased quality of life. Sacrocolpopexy can treat women with vaginal vault prolapse (VVP), multicompartmental POP, and/or a history of failed prolapse procedures. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) is the gold standard for VVP and is superior to vaginal sacrocolpopexy, with fewer recurrent prolapses and less dyspareunia. Vaginal prolapse repairs, however, are often faster and offer patients a shorter recovery time. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) aims to bridge this gap and to provide the outcomes of ASC with decreased morbidity.

Objective: This review evaluates the recent literature on LSC as a therapy for POP.

Evidence Acquisition: A PubMed search of the available English literature on LSC was performed. The reference lists of selected articles were reviewed, and additional on-topic articles were included. Some 50 articles were screened, 22 articles were selected, and the reported outcomes from 11 series are presented in this review.

Evidence Synthesis: Laparoscopic experience with POP has advanced tremendously, and LSC results from >1000 patients in 11 series support this. Conversion rates and operative times have decreased with increased experience. Mean operative time was 158 min (range: 96-286 min) with a 2.7% conversion rate (range: 0-11%) and a 1.6% early reoperation rate (range: 0-3.9%). With a mean follow-up of 24.6 mo (range: 11.4-66 mo), there was, on average, a 94.4% satisfaction rate, a 6.2% prolapse reoperation rate, and a 2.7% mesh erosion rate. Several centers have demonstrated that excellent outcomes with LSC are reproducible in terms of operative parameters, durable results, minimal complications, and high levels of patient satisfaction.

Conclusions: LSC upholds the outcomes of the gold standard ASC with minimal morbidity. Longer prospective and randomized trials are needed to confirm these results.

Citing Articles

Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair Using Robotic-Assisted Sacral Hysterocolpopexy vs Vaginal Surgery with the Uphold™ System: 1-Year Clinical Outcomes.

Poutakidis G, Falconer C, Altman D, Johannesson U, Zhang A, Ericson C Int Urogynecol J. 2025; .

PMID: 39776188 DOI: 10.1007/s00192-024-06017-6.


Investigating Racial, Ethnic, and Socioeconomic Disparities in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery.

DeAndrade S, DePorto K, Crawford K, Saporito L, Nguyen A, Yazdany T Urogynecology (Phila). 2025; 31(3):174-182.

PMID: 39760186 PMC: 11902576. DOI: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000001633.


Short-Term Complications of Concomitant Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Rectal Prolapse Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Hadizadeh A, Chill H, Leffelman A, Paya-Ten C, Chang C, Goldberg R Int Urogynecol J. 2024; .

PMID: 39673618 DOI: 10.1007/s00192-024-06007-8.


Innovative vaginal manipulator technique vs. traditional method for vaginal fornix deployment in robotic sacrocolpopexy.

Ota Y, Ota K, Takahashi T, Kawamura S, Shiota M, Shimoya K Front Surg. 2024; 11:1491233.

PMID: 39575450 PMC: 11578927. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2024.1491233.


Three-Year Outcomes of a Multicenter Study of Japanese-Style Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy.

Kuwata T, Kashihara H, Kato C, Takeyama M, Yamaguchi A, Moriyama Y Int Urogynecol J. 2024; 36(1):71-78.

PMID: 39470780 DOI: 10.1007/s00192-024-05954-6.