Midterm comparison of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse

Introduction and hypothesis The objective was to retrospectively analyze the midterm efficacy of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension (HUS) and sacrocolpopexy (SC) in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse. Methods Patients who underwent laparoscopic HUS and SC in our cente...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International Urogynecology Journal 2023-10, Vol.34 (10), p.2501-2506
Hauptverfasser: Guan, Yiqi, Zhang, Kun, Han, Jinsong, Yao, Ying, Wang, Yiting, Yang, Junfang
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2506
container_issue 10
container_start_page 2501
container_title International Urogynecology Journal
container_volume 34
creator Guan, Yiqi
Zhang, Kun
Han, Jinsong
Yao, Ying
Wang, Yiting
Yang, Junfang
description Introduction and hypothesis The objective was to retrospectively analyze the midterm efficacy of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension (HUS) and sacrocolpopexy (SC) in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse. Methods Patients who underwent laparoscopic HUS and SC in our center from 2013 to 2019 with follow-ups were included, consisting of laparoscopic HUS (group A, n =72) or SC (mesh added, group B, n =54). The general data of patients, pelvic organ prolapse quantitative examination (POP-Q) score, Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory short form 20 score (PFDI-20) before and after operation, perioperative conditions, Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), and postoperative complications were collected for statistical analysis and comparison between groups. Results There was no statistical difference in preoperative data between groups. The median follow-up time was 48 months. The objective recurrence rate of group A was higher than that of group B, without statistical significance. One patient in group B had a second operation owing to recurrence. The exposure rate of mesh in group B was 3.70%. There was no significant difference in deviation of POP-Q and PFDI-20 pre- and post-operation. The proportion of new defecation abnormalities in group A was lower. The total hospitalization expenses and surgical consumables in group B were significantly higher than those in group A. Conclusions The midterm curative effect of laparoscopic HUS is similar to that of SC in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse. The former has the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss, shorter postoperative hospital stay, lower cost, fewer new defecation abnormalities, and there were no complications related to mesh.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s00192-023-05552-y
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2818746449</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2879629944</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-85587e25faedcdb34314baab222b7ee2451584b6efd51d1ac9af4773cae2ae3e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1u1TAQhS0EoreFF2CBLLFhE_BvnCxRVX6kIjawtibO5F5XSRzsBPU-Bm_MtLeAxIKV5Zlvzhn7MPZCijdSCPe2CCFbVQmlK2GtVdXxEdtJo3WlqfaY7USrXaVNrc7YeSk3QggjrHjKzrRTSjld79jPz7FfMU88pGmBHEuaeRr4CHRJJaQlBn6I-wPfiEoFQoaRj3EPE84rL1tZcC6RhmDu-V07hTQuacHbI48zXw_I14yw3uMkPKUeM6xUTbzgD8zIgTxIdMmJXAs-Y08GGAs-fzgv2Lf3V18vP1bXXz58unx3XQWt6rVqrG0cKjsA9qHvtNHSdAAdPaxziMpYaRvT1Tj0VvYSQguDcU4HQAWoUV-w1yddMv6-YVn9FEvAcYQZ01a8amTjTG1MS-irf9CbtOWZtiPKtbVqW2OIUieKPqGUjINfcpwgH70U_i4wfwrMUzj-PjB_pKGXD9JbN2H_Z-R3QgToE1CoNe8x__X-j-wvHXSlyg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2879629944</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Midterm comparison of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse</title><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Guan, Yiqi ; Zhang, Kun ; Han, Jinsong ; Yao, Ying ; Wang, Yiting ; Yang, Junfang</creator><creatorcontrib>Guan, Yiqi ; Zhang, Kun ; Han, Jinsong ; Yao, Ying ; Wang, Yiting ; Yang, Junfang</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction and hypothesis The objective was to retrospectively analyze the midterm efficacy of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension (HUS) and sacrocolpopexy (SC) in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse. Methods Patients who underwent laparoscopic HUS and SC in our center from 2013 to 2019 with follow-ups were included, consisting of laparoscopic HUS (group A, n =72) or SC (mesh added, group B, n =54). The general data of patients, pelvic organ prolapse quantitative examination (POP-Q) score, Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory short form 20 score (PFDI-20) before and after operation, perioperative conditions, Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), and postoperative complications were collected for statistical analysis and comparison between groups. Results There was no statistical difference in preoperative data between groups. The median follow-up time was 48 months. The objective recurrence rate of group A was higher than that of group B, without statistical significance. One patient in group B had a second operation owing to recurrence. The exposure rate of mesh in group B was 3.70%. There was no significant difference in deviation of POP-Q and PFDI-20 pre- and post-operation. The proportion of new defecation abnormalities in group A was lower. The total hospitalization expenses and surgical consumables in group B were significantly higher than those in group A. Conclusions The midterm curative effect of laparoscopic HUS is similar to that of SC in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse. The former has the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss, shorter postoperative hospital stay, lower cost, fewer new defecation abnormalities, and there were no complications related to mesh.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0937-3462</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1433-3023</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00192-023-05552-y</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37222736</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Defecation ; Gynecology ; Laparoscopy ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Original Article ; Urology</subject><ispartof>International Urogynecology Journal, 2023-10, Vol.34 (10), p.2501-2506</ispartof><rights>The International Urogynecological Association 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><rights>2023. The International Urogynecological Association.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-85587e25faedcdb34314baab222b7ee2451584b6efd51d1ac9af4773cae2ae3e3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9803-2999</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00192-023-05552-y$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00192-023-05552-y$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37222736$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Guan, Yiqi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Kun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Han, Jinsong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yao, Ying</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Yiting</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Junfang</creatorcontrib><title>Midterm comparison of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse</title><title>International Urogynecology Journal</title><addtitle>Int Urogynecol J</addtitle><addtitle>Int Urogynecol J</addtitle><description>Introduction and hypothesis The objective was to retrospectively analyze the midterm efficacy of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension (HUS) and sacrocolpopexy (SC) in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse. Methods Patients who underwent laparoscopic HUS and SC in our center from 2013 to 2019 with follow-ups were included, consisting of laparoscopic HUS (group A, n =72) or SC (mesh added, group B, n =54). The general data of patients, pelvic organ prolapse quantitative examination (POP-Q) score, Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory short form 20 score (PFDI-20) before and after operation, perioperative conditions, Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), and postoperative complications were collected for statistical analysis and comparison between groups. Results There was no statistical difference in preoperative data between groups. The median follow-up time was 48 months. The objective recurrence rate of group A was higher than that of group B, without statistical significance. One patient in group B had a second operation owing to recurrence. The exposure rate of mesh in group B was 3.70%. There was no significant difference in deviation of POP-Q and PFDI-20 pre- and post-operation. The proportion of new defecation abnormalities in group A was lower. The total hospitalization expenses and surgical consumables in group B were significantly higher than those in group A. Conclusions The midterm curative effect of laparoscopic HUS is similar to that of SC in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse. The former has the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss, shorter postoperative hospital stay, lower cost, fewer new defecation abnormalities, and there were no complications related to mesh.</description><subject>Defecation</subject><subject>Gynecology</subject><subject>Laparoscopy</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Urology</subject><issn>0937-3462</issn><issn>1433-3023</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1u1TAQhS0EoreFF2CBLLFhE_BvnCxRVX6kIjawtibO5F5XSRzsBPU-Bm_MtLeAxIKV5Zlvzhn7MPZCijdSCPe2CCFbVQmlK2GtVdXxEdtJo3WlqfaY7USrXaVNrc7YeSk3QggjrHjKzrRTSjld79jPz7FfMU88pGmBHEuaeRr4CHRJJaQlBn6I-wPfiEoFQoaRj3EPE84rL1tZcC6RhmDu-V07hTQuacHbI48zXw_I14yw3uMkPKUeM6xUTbzgD8zIgTxIdMmJXAs-Y08GGAs-fzgv2Lf3V18vP1bXXz58unx3XQWt6rVqrG0cKjsA9qHvtNHSdAAdPaxziMpYaRvT1Tj0VvYSQguDcU4HQAWoUV-w1yddMv6-YVn9FEvAcYQZ01a8amTjTG1MS-irf9CbtOWZtiPKtbVqW2OIUieKPqGUjINfcpwgH70U_i4wfwrMUzj-PjB_pKGXD9JbN2H_Z-R3QgToE1CoNe8x__X-j-wvHXSlyg</recordid><startdate>20231001</startdate><enddate>20231001</enddate><creator>Guan, Yiqi</creator><creator>Zhang, Kun</creator><creator>Han, Jinsong</creator><creator>Yao, Ying</creator><creator>Wang, Yiting</creator><creator>Yang, Junfang</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9803-2999</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20231001</creationdate><title>Midterm comparison of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse</title><author>Guan, Yiqi ; Zhang, Kun ; Han, Jinsong ; Yao, Ying ; Wang, Yiting ; Yang, Junfang</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-85587e25faedcdb34314baab222b7ee2451584b6efd51d1ac9af4773cae2ae3e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Defecation</topic><topic>Gynecology</topic><topic>Laparoscopy</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Urology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Guan, Yiqi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Kun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Han, Jinsong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yao, Ying</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Yiting</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Junfang</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International Urogynecology Journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Guan, Yiqi</au><au>Zhang, Kun</au><au>Han, Jinsong</au><au>Yao, Ying</au><au>Wang, Yiting</au><au>Yang, Junfang</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Midterm comparison of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse</atitle><jtitle>International Urogynecology Journal</jtitle><stitle>Int Urogynecol J</stitle><addtitle>Int Urogynecol J</addtitle><date>2023-10-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>2501</spage><epage>2506</epage><pages>2501-2506</pages><issn>0937-3462</issn><eissn>1433-3023</eissn><abstract>Introduction and hypothesis The objective was to retrospectively analyze the midterm efficacy of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension (HUS) and sacrocolpopexy (SC) in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse. Methods Patients who underwent laparoscopic HUS and SC in our center from 2013 to 2019 with follow-ups were included, consisting of laparoscopic HUS (group A, n =72) or SC (mesh added, group B, n =54). The general data of patients, pelvic organ prolapse quantitative examination (POP-Q) score, Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory short form 20 score (PFDI-20) before and after operation, perioperative conditions, Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), and postoperative complications were collected for statistical analysis and comparison between groups. Results There was no statistical difference in preoperative data between groups. The median follow-up time was 48 months. The objective recurrence rate of group A was higher than that of group B, without statistical significance. One patient in group B had a second operation owing to recurrence. The exposure rate of mesh in group B was 3.70%. There was no significant difference in deviation of POP-Q and PFDI-20 pre- and post-operation. The proportion of new defecation abnormalities in group A was lower. The total hospitalization expenses and surgical consumables in group B were significantly higher than those in group A. Conclusions The midterm curative effect of laparoscopic HUS is similar to that of SC in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse. The former has the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss, shorter postoperative hospital stay, lower cost, fewer new defecation abnormalities, and there were no complications related to mesh.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><pmid>37222736</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00192-023-05552-y</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9803-2999</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0937-3462
ispartof International Urogynecology Journal, 2023-10, Vol.34 (10), p.2501-2506
issn 0937-3462
1433-3023
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2818746449
source SpringerNature Journals
subjects Defecation
Gynecology
Laparoscopy
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Original Article
Urology
title Midterm comparison of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-22T07%3A31%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Midterm%20comparison%20of%20laparoscopic%20high%20uterosacral%20ligament%20suspension%20and%20sacrocolpopexy%20in%20the%20treatment%20of%20moderate%20to%20severe%20apical%20prolapse&rft.jtitle=International%20Urogynecology%20Journal&rft.au=Guan,%20Yiqi&rft.date=2023-10-01&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=2501&rft.epage=2506&rft.pages=2501-2506&rft.issn=0937-3462&rft.eissn=1433-3023&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00192-023-05552-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2879629944%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2879629944&rft_id=info:pmid/37222736&rfr_iscdi=true