Symptomatic and anatomic 1-year outcomes after robotic and abdominal sacrocolpopexy

Objective The purpose of this study was to compare symptomatic and anatomic outcomes 1 year after robotic vs abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Study Design Our retrospective cohort study compared women who underwent robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) with 1 surgeon to those who underwent abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) as part of the Colpopexy and Urinary Reduction Efforts trial. Our primary outcome was a composite measure of vaginal bulge symptoms or repeat surgery for prolapse. Results We studied 447 women (125 with RSC and 322 with ASC). Baseline characteristics were similar. There were no significant differences in surgical failures 1 year after surgery based on our primary composite outcome (7/86 [8%] vs 12/304 [4%]; P = .16). When we considered anatomic failure, there were also no significant differences between RSC and ASC (4/70 [6%] vs 16/289 [6%]; P = .57). Conclusion One year after sacrocolpopexy, women who underwent RSC have similar symptomatic and anatomic success compared with those women who underwent ASC.