Comparison of Different Laparoscopic Sacropexy Procedures for Advanced Uterine Prolapse: A Retrospective Analysis.

Abstract

<h4>Study objective</h4>To compare the long-term outcomes and complications of 3 different variants of laparoscopic sacropexy.<h4>Design</h4>Single-center retrospective cohort study.<h4>Setting</h4>A tertiary university hospital.<h4>Patients</h4>A total of 483 patients with advanced uterine prolapse who underwent laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy (LSH), laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy with concomitant laparoscopic sacrocervicopexy (LSCH + LSC), or total laparoscopic hysterectomy with concomitant laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (TLH + LSC).<h4>Interventions</h4>Demographic data, Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification scores, questionnaire results, surgical conditions, postoperative outcomes, and complications were all extracted from medical and follow-up records.<h4>Measurements and main results</h4>Between April 2012 and December 2020, 277 women underwent LSH, 95 women underwent LSCH + LSC, and 111 women underwent TLH + LSC. LSH procedures were associated with statistically significantly least blood loss and least postoperative hospital days and catheterization days (all p <.001). During the median follow-up of 32 months (13-117 months), analysis of the data revealed notable anatomic correction in all groups regarding Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification measurements (p <.001), and the anatomic cure rate showed no significant difference among these 3 groups (p = .273). No statistically significant differences were detected for prolapse recurrence (p = .171) and functional improvements among these groups. Neither intraoperative injuries (p = .098) nor total postoperative complications (p = .218) differed considerably, whereas the rate of severe postoperative complications (p <.001) including mesh exposure (p = .004) was significantly higher in the TLH + LSC group than that in the other groups.<h4>Conclusions</h4>LSH is the appropriate choice for women with uterine prolapse without contraindications for uterine preservation. For patients with benign uterine lesions and a normal cervix, LSCH + LSC is a safer approach that provides similar anatomic results and improved quality of life scores that are similar to those of TLH + LSC. For patients with lesions in the uterus and cervix, TLH + LSC should be selected.