The comparison of the anatomical and symptomatic outcomes of sacrocolpopexy and posterior intravaginal slingoplasty

Introduction and hypothesis The aim of this study was to compare abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASCP) with posterior intravaginal slingoplasty (PIVS) in terms of lower urinary tract symptoms and anatomical restoration. Methods Ninety-two patients underwent PIVS and 98 patients underwent ASCP. Results Regarding ASCP, the blood loss, operation time, and hospitalization length were 537 ml, 94.5 min, and 3.07 days, respectively. Eight (8) patients required blood transfusion; urinary retention was diagnosed in four cases, surgical side infection was seen in three cases; constipation was a problem in nine cases; retroperitoneal haematoma was observed in one case; and bladder injury happened in two cases. Regarding PIVS, the blood loss, operation time, and hospitalization length were 275 ml, 53 min, and 2.08 days, respectively. Intramuscular haematoma was diagnosed in one patient, and constipation was a problem in one patient. Conclusions ASCP and PIVS had same efficiency for the treatment of vault prolapse during the study follow-up. Both operations had good anatomical restoration for rectocele and cystocele. Moreover, PIVS also cured enterocele as an additional advantageous over ASCP. Besides, PIVS has significantly improved stress urinary incontinence, nocturia, and pelvic pain in terms of lower urinary tract symptoms compared to ASCP.