Vaginal morphology and position associated with prolapse recurrence after vaginal surgery: A secondary analysis of the DEMAND study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify vaginal morphology and position factors associated with prolapse recurrence following vaginal surgery. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of magnetic resonance images (MRI) of the Defining Mechanisms of Anterior Vaginal Wall Descent cross-sectional study. SETTING: Eight clinical sites in the US Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. POPULATION OR SAMPLE: Women who underwent vaginal mesh hysteropexy (hysteropexy) with sacrospinous fixation or vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension (hysterectomy) for uterovaginal prolapse between April 2013 and February 2015. METHODS: The MRI (rest, strain) obtained 30-42 months after surgery, or earlier for participants with recurrence who desired reoperation before 30 months, were analysed. MRI-based prolapse recurrence was defined as prolapse beyond the hymen at strain on MRI. Vaginal segmentations (at rest) were used to create three-dimensional models placed in a morphometry algorithm to quantify and compare vaginal morphology (angulation, dimensions) and position. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Vaginal angulation (upper, lower and upper-lower vaginal angles in the sagittal and coronal plane), dimensions (length, maximum transverse width, surface area, volume) and position (apex, mid-vagina) at rest. RESULTS: Of the 82 women analysed, 12/41 (29%) in the hysteropexy group and 22/41 (54%) in the hysterectomy group had prolapse recurrence. After hysteropexy, women with recurrence had a more laterally deviated upper vagina (p = 0.02) at rest than women with successful surgery. After hysterectomy, women with recurrence had a more inferiorly (lower) positioned vaginal apex (p = 0.01) and mid-vagina (p = 0.01) at rest than women with successful surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Vaginal angulation and position were associated with prolapse recurrence and suggestive of vaginal support mechanisms related to surgical technique and potential unaddressed anatomical defects. Future prospective studies in women before and after prolapse surgery may distinguish these two factors.

Vaginal hysteropexy compared with vaginal hysterectomy with apical suspension for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: A 5-year cost-effectiveness Markov model.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to perform a 5-year cost-effectiveness analysis of transvaginal hysteropexy (HP) via sacrospinous ligament fixation (SS) or uterosacral ligament suspension (US) versus vaginal hysterectomy (VH) with apical suspension via sacrospinous ligament fixation (SS) or uterosacral ligament suspension (US) for the treatment of uterine prolapse. DESIGN: A decision analytic model assessed the cost-effectiveness of the surgical intervention over a 5-year horizon. SETTING: This model was constructed using TreeAge® software. POPULATION OR SAMPLE: Healthy women undergoing surgery for uterine prolapse were modeled. METHODS: A Markov model was constructed to simulate the possible recurrence of prolapse. Recurrence rates, repeat surgery for surgical failures and complication rates were modeled. Base case, sensitivity analyses and probabilistic modeling were performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of <$100 000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). RESULTS: Using the available prolapse recurrence rates and repeat surgery rates in the literature, both HP-SS and HP-US are cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of <$100 000 per QALY. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for HP-US compared to HP-SS is $90 738.14, while VH-US and VH-SS are both dominated strategies. HP-US is the optimal cost-effective strategy but decays exponentially with increasing probability of prolapse recurrence and need for repeat surgery after failed hysteropexy. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) favors sacrospinous hysteropexy until reaching a WTP threshold between $90 000 and $100 000. CONCLUSION: Hysteropexy surgical strategies are cost-effective transvaginal surgical approaches for uterine prolapse. Vaginal hysterectomy with apical suspension becomes more cost-effective with increasing probability of prolapse recurrence and need for repeat surgery after failed hysteropexy. Given the variability of prolapse recurrence rates in the literature, more comparative studies are needed to understand the cost-effectiveness relationship between these different surgical approaches.

Pilsner Modification of Mesh Sacrohysterocolpopexy (PiMMS): An Initial Report on Safety and Efficacy.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: It is reported that up to 60% of women would prefer to spare their uterus during pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair surgery. A reliable hysteropexy technique is therefore crucial. We aimed to describe the safety profile and initial core patient-reported and clinical outcomes of the Pilsner modification of laparoscopic mesh sacrohysterocolpopexy (PiMMS) in comparison with the laparoscopic sacrohysterocolpopexy technique (standard laparoscopic sacrohysterocolpopexy [sLSH]) previously used in our unit. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in a single tertiary referral urogynecological center. All patients who underwent laparoscopic mesh sacrohysterocolpopexy between 1 January 2015, and 31 January 2022 were included in the study. Follow-up clinical, patient-reported, and imaging outcomes at the 12-month follow-up time point are presented. RESULTS: A total of 87 patients were included. Of these, 49 (56.3%) and 38 (43.7%) underwent sLSH and PiMMS respectively. Low numbers of perioperative complications were found in both groups with no mesh-related complications reported following PiMMS up to 12 months postoperatively. There were no apical compartment failures in either group. There were 8 (17.0%) vs 1 (2.7%) anterior compartment failures (Ba ≤ -1) in the sLSH and PiMMS groups respectively (p = 0.07) at 12 months. At the 1-year follow-up, 42 (89.4%) patients reported a Patient Global Impression of Improvement score of ≤ 2 in the sLSH groups compared with 35 (94.6%) patients following PiMMS. CONCLUSIONS: The PiMMS technique seems to have comparable safety profile and patient-reported outcomes with the sLSH technique. However, there is a trend toward reduced anterior compartment failures with this modification. The findings of this preliminary report need to be re-evaluated in a well-powered prospective study.

Patient Impression of Improvement 1 year After Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy in Women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Stage 2 or Higher.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Patient-reported outcomes are relevant outcomes in studies on pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery, as anatomical recurrence alone does not have a significant correlation with perceived improvement. In the present study, the patient's impression of improvement after 1 year is studied after vaginal hysterectomy (VH) versus sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH) in large cohorts from daily clinical practice. We hypothesize that there is no difference between the groups. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis on prospectively collected data in a multicenter cohort of patients who underwent VH or SSH for symptomatic POP. All patients had a POP-Q stage ≥ 2 in at least one compartment at baseline and were treated with VH or SSH between 2002 and 2019. The primary outcome was the patient-reported score on the patient global impression of improvement index (PGI-I) 1 year after surgery. The secondary outcome was a composite outcome of surgical success, defined as the absence of recurrent POP beyond the hymen with bothersome bulge symptoms and/or repeat surgery. RESULTS: A total of 378 women (196 VH and 182 SSH) were included. The median score on the PGI-I did not differ between VH and SSH. At 1 year post-operatively, 77 women after VH (73%) and 77 women after SSH (75%) considered their condition (very) much improved (p = 0.86). There was no difference in composite outcome of surgical success (126 out of 137 women [92%] after VH, 118 out of 125 women [94%] after SSH; p = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that there was no difference in the type of surgery, VH or SSH, with regard to the patient's impression of improvement 1 year postoperatively in a large cohort from daily clinical practice.

The Outcomes of the Manchester Procedure Versus Sacrospinous Ligament Hysteropexy for Uterine Prolapse: A Study of the British Society of Urogynaecology Database.

INTRODUCTION: The Manchester procedure (MP) and sacrospinous ligament hysteropexy (SSHP) have long been established as effective conservative surgeries for treating uterine prolapse. However, there have been limited studies on outcomes comparing these two techniques. METHODOLOGY: This was a prospective cohort study of the British Society of Urogynaecology database between February 2007 and 2023 of MP and SSHP outcomes from 90 centres in the UK. The primary outcome was the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I). The other outcomes compared were the absence of pelvic organ prolapse beyond the hymen in any compartment evaluated by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q), complications, and the incidence of reported symptomatic prolapse within 1 year after the operation. RESULTS: There were 718 women who underwent MP and 2,384 who had SSHP. The PGI-I score was significantly better in the MP group (p value <0.001). The rates of symptomatic prolapse within 1 year (odds ratio [OR] 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.18-0.69; p value 0.001), recurrence of prolapse beyond the hymen (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03-0.53; p value 0.001) and apical recurrence (OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.01-0.65; p value 0.003) during follow-up examination were lower in the MP group. The combined peri-operative and post-operative complications reported in both groups were comparatively similar. CONCLUSION: The symptom improvement was better and recurrence was lower with the MP than with SSHP at short-term follow-up.

Novel Vaginal Cerclage Assisted Laparoscopic Cervico-Sacropexy Technique for Uterovaginal Prolapse.

AIM: Laparoscopic hysteropexy is a complicated procedure that requires specialized surgical skills, including precise dissection and suturing. The aim is to describe the technical considerations for performing a new, feasible, and minimally invasive technique to correct apical and concurrent apical and anterior vaginal wall defects. METHOD: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 70 consecutive women who underwent surgery for stage ≥3 uterovaginal prolapse. As a part of the technique, an anterior 2-cm long transverse incision was made at the anterior cervicovaginal junction, and the bladder was dissected through blunt and sharp dissection to the level of the isthmus. A posterior colpotomy was performed. A polypropylene tape was inserted into the cervical connective tissue, and the free arms of the tape were inserted into the peritoneum via the posterior colpotomy. Two arms of the tape were passed from the tunnel parallel and medial to a right sacrouterine fold, then fixed to the anterior longitudinal ligament via the laparoscopic route. RESULTS: The tape can be inserted into the cervix in a median of 15 min, and the laparoscopy procedure can be completed in 24 min. No mesh erosion or long-term complications occurred. At a 1-year control, there were no cases of recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: This novel cervico-sacrocolpopexy technique is a feasible and safe, minimally invasive way to correct apical or multicompartment defects, with a short operation time and an anatomical result that mimics the normal sacrouterine ligament.

Laparoscopic Management of Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Case Series.

Background: Pelvic static disorders have an important impact on patients' quality of life, constituting a real public health problem, despite the fact that they are not life-threatening. Minimally invasive procedures of pelvic organ prolapse has many advantages, laparoscopic hysteropexy and colpopexy being a standard with real benefits: minimal incisions, reduced postoperative complications, shorter hospital stay and a low recurrence rate. Laparoscopic management of such cases is recommended, but requires teams well trained in minimally invasive surgery. Case presentation: We presented a series of successful cases of two patients with grade III hysterocele, respectively vaginal vault prolapse, who were treated minimally invasively with a lateral laparoscopic hysteropexy, respectively lateral laparoscopic colpopexy. Given the well-known benefits of minimally invasive surgery, we chose laparoscopic surgery because of the smaller surgical impact and faster return to normal life. The surgical procedures were performed successfully, without complications, with rapid recovery, without recurrence. Conclusion: Hysteropexy and laparoscopic colpopexy are safe and effective surgical procedures in selected cases.

Advantages of Laparoscopic Treatment in Pelvic Static Disorders by Lateral Hystero/Colpopexy - A Single Center Experience.

Introduction: Pelvic organ prolapse is the most frequent and common health problem faced by most patients, representing the descent into the vagina or beyond the introitus of one or more pelvic organs, involving three compartments: anterior-bladder, apical-uterus and posterior-rectus. Lateral hystero/colpopexy is an alternative approach in the repair of symptomatic anterior and apical pelvic prolapse. The main objective is to correct pelvic floor defects, restore anatomy, relieve pressure and maintain normal sexual function. Material and Methods: Surgical intervention was applied to patients with prolapse greater than grade II according to the international prolapse quantification system (POP-Q). For apical, anterior prolapse, the bladder peritoneum is dissected and a polypropylene mesh is fitted to the round ligaments with suspension of the isthmus and cervix and fixation of the mesh with CapSure tacks followed by closure of the vaginal peritoneum. Results: During the performance of the technique I had no intraoperative or postoperative complications. Conservation of the uterus proved to be effective for prolapse correction, significant improvements in patient quality of life, frequency of nocturia, degree of dyspareunia and urgency symptoms were observed. Conclusion: Uterine preservation by lateral hystero/colpopexy is a new, feasible and successful method for treating prolapse.

Characteristics associated with composite surgical failure over 5 years of women in a randomized trial of sacrospinous hysteropexy with graft vs vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension.

BACKGROUND: Among women with symptomatic uterovaginal prolapse undergoing vaginal surgery in the Vaginal hysterectomy with Native Tissue Vault Suspension vs Sacrospinous Hysteropexy with Graft Suspension (Study for Uterine Prolapse Procedures Randomized Trial) trial, sacrospinous hysteropexy with graft (hysteropexy) resulted in a lower composite surgical failure rate than vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral suspension over 5 years. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify factors associated with the rate of surgical failure over 5 years among women undergoing sacrospinous hysteropexy with graft vs vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral suspension for uterovaginal prolapse. STUDY DESIGN: This planned secondary analysis of a comparative effectiveness trial of 2 transvaginal apical suspensions (NCT01802281) defined surgical failure as either retreatment of prolapse, recurrence of prolapse beyond the hymen, or bothersome prolapse symptoms. Baseline clinical and sociodemographic factors for eligible participants receiving the randomized surgery (N=173) were compared across categories of failure (≤1 year, >1 year, and no failure) with rank-based tests. Factors with adequate prevalence and clinical relevance were assessed for minimally adjusted bivariate associations using piecewise exponential survival models adjusting for randomized apical repair and clinical site. The multivariable model included factors with bivariate P<.2, additional clinically important variables, apical repair, and clinical site. Backward selection determined final retained risk factors (P<.1) with statistical significance evaluated by Bonferroni correction (P<.005). Final factors were assessed for interaction with type of apical repair at P<.1. Association is presented by adjusted hazard ratios and further illustrated by categorization of risk factors. RESULTS: In the final multivariable model, body mass index (increase of 5 kg/m2: adjusted hazard ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-2.2; P<.001) and duration of prolapse symptoms (increase of 1 year: adjusted hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-1.1; P<.005) were associated with composite surgical failure, where rates of failure were 2.9 and 1.8 times higher in women with obesity and women who are overweight than women who have normal weight and women who are underweight (95% confidence intervals, 1.5-5.8 and 0.9-3.5) and 3.0 times higher in women experiencing >5 years prolapse symptoms than women experiencing ≤5 years prolapse symptoms (95% confidence interval, 1.8-5.0). Sacrospinous hysteropexy with graft had a lower rate of failure than hysterectomy with uterosacral suspension (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.6; 95% confidence interval, 0.4-1.0; P=.05). The interaction between symptom duration and apical repair (P=.07) indicated that failure was less likely after hysteropexy than hysterectomy for those with ≤5 years symptom duration (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-0.9), but not for those with >5 years symptom duration (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.0; 95% confidence interval 0.5-2.1). CONCLUSION: Obesity and duration of prolapse symptoms have been determined as risk factors associated with surgical failure over 5 years from transvaginal prolapse repair, regardless of approach. Providers and patients should consider these modifiable risk factors when discussing treatment plans for bothersome prolapse.

Patient's preference for sacrospinous hysteropexy or modified Manchester operation: A discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate women's preference for modified Manchester (MM) or sacrospinous hysteropexy (SH) as surgery for uterine prolapse. DESIGN: Labelled discrete choice experiment (DCE). SETTING: Eight Dutch hospitals. POPULATION: Women with uterine prolapse, eligible for primary surgery and preference for uterus preservation. METHODS: DCEs are attribute-based surveys. The two treatment options were labelled as MM and SH. Attributes in this survey were treatment success ( levels SH: 84%, 89%, 94%; levels MM: 89%, 93%, 96%), dyspareunia (levels: 0%, 5%, 10%), cervical stenosis (levels: 1%, 6%, 11%) and severe buttock pain (levels: 0%, 1%). A different combination of attribute levels was used in each choice set. Women completed nine choice sets, making a choice based on attribute levels. Data were analysed in multinomial logit models. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Women's preference for MM or SH. RESULTS: 137 DCEs were completed (1233 choice sets). SH was chosen in 49% of the choice sets, MM in 51%. Of all women, 39 (28%) always chose the same surgery. After exclusion of this group, 882 choice sets were analysed, in which women preferred MM, likely associated with a labelling effect, i.e. description of the procedure, rather than the tested attributes. In that group, MM was chosen in 53% of the choice sets and SH in 47%. When choosing MM, next to the label, dyspareunia was relevant for decision-making. For SH, all attributes were relevant for decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: The preference of women for MM or SH seems almost equally divided. The variety in preference supports the importance of individualised healthcare.

Anterior approach sacrospinous hysteropexy: native tissue compared with mesh-augmented repair for primary uterovaginal prolapse management.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Anterior sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH) was popularized by transvaginal mesh kits. Following mesh-kit market withdrawal, we hypothesized similar efficacy through native-tissue reattachment of the pubocervical fascia with fixation of the anterior cervix to the sacrospinous ligament. Few analyses for anterior native-tissue versus mesh-augmented SSH exist. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of women who underwent transvaginal anterior SSH between 01 January 2016 and 31 December 2022 was performed. Women who underwent a mesh-augmented (Uphold Lite Vaginal Support System™) versus native-tissue repair were compared. Composite success was defined as no bulge symptoms, no retreatment, and no recurrence beyond the hymen with apex nondescended > one third of the total vaginal length. Descriptive and bivariate statistics were obtained as indicated. RESULTS: Of 223 women screened, inclusion criteria were met by 124 (40 mesh-augmented; 84 native-tissue). There was no difference in pre-operative characteristics between groups. Composite success was demonstrated in 95.2% of women with a median follow-up of 224 days (range: 30-988). Two women in the mesh-augmented group reported bulge symptoms and underwent re-treatment with a pessary. Four women in the native-tissue group reported bulge symptoms; 3 underwent re-treatment (2 pessary, 1 surgery). There were no differences in composite success rates between groups (p=0.954). There were additionally no differences in intra-operative (p=0.752) or post-operative (p=0.292) complication rates between the groups. There were no mesh-related complications, including exposure or chronic pelvic pain. CONCLUSIONS: Ninety-five percent of women achieved surgical success and the use of mesh augmentation did not confer added benefit in terms of efficacy or complications when compared with native tissue. Further long-term data are needed to continue our assessment of native-tissue anterior SSH.

Long-term development of surgical outcome of laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy with anterior and posterior mesh extension.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Long-term durability and functional outcome of laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy (LSH) remains to be confirmed. We set out to assess the development of surgical outcome in women with increasing minimal follow-up. METHODS: All women after LSH with anterior and posterior mesh extension operated for advanced apical uterine prolapse at Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire clinic from July 2005 to June 2020 were enrolled in this retrospective study. Last known follow-up information was used for the analysis and allocation into groups. The surgical success was defined as no prolapse beyond hymen, no symptomatic recurrence or no retreatment. Functional outcome was evaluated from validated questionnaires and presence of pelvic floor disorders. The outcomes were compared with preoperative state using chi-square and Fisher's test; p < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: In total, 270 patients after LSH with a follow-up of up to 14.5 years were enrolled and divided into groups according to their last follow-up length: ≥ 1 year 242, ≥ 3 years 112, ≥ 5 years 76, ≥ 7 years 45 and ≥ 10 years 18 women. Increase of minimal follow-up was associated with gradual decrease in surgical success. Rates of stress urinary incontinence were unchanged by the surgery, while anal incontinence and constipation rates decreased significantly; 14.5% of women were operated on for SUI in the follow-up. The PFDI-20, PFIQ-7 and VAS bother scores decreased significantly regardless of minimal follow-up length. CONCLUSIONS: LSH with anterior and posterior mesh extension is a safe, effective and durable surgery with a positive long-term effect on quality of life. Although the surgical success gradually decreases, LSH remains a surgical success in most women.

A cost-effective model for training in Robot-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy.

BACKGROUND: The number of robotically assisted sacrocolpopexy procedures are increasing; therefore, experienced clinicians are needed. Simulation-based cadaver models are challenging in aspects of cost and availability. Therefore, we need to look at alternative and more cost-effective models. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this video was to design a new surgical model for the training of robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy, which is affordable and accessible. METHODS: We used a whole chicken model to simulate the female pelvic floor. We used Medtronic's Hugo™ RAS system as the robotic console in that procedure. A vaginal cuff was prepared from the proventriculus (stomach), and a Y shaped mesh was secured to the ischium to simulate the sacrocolpopexy procedure. CONCLUSION: This model is easily constructed and in our view is cost-effective. We have demonstrated a new valuable education tool that can serve as a practical simulation model to teach the sacrocolpopexy procedure and to improve trainees' skills. A larger cohort study size is essential to demonstrate the learning curve among young trainees using this simulation model.

Pelvic organ prolapse recurrence after pregnancy following uterine-sparing prolapse repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: We sought to determine rates of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) recurrence following pregnancy and delivery in reproductive-age women with prior hysteropexy. METHODS: Scopus, MEDLine, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched from inception to May 2020 for combinations of any of the keywords: "pregnancy", "delivery", "fertility", or "cesarean" with a comprehensive list of uterine-sparing surgical procedures for POP repair. Using approach, 1,817 articles were identified describing surgical, uterine-sparing POP repair techniques and subsequent pregnancy and delivery outcomes in reproductive-age women.   RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies describing 218 pregnancies, including 215 deliveries and 3 abortions, were summarized using narrative review and descriptive statistics. Successful pregnancies were reported following a diverse range of uterine-sparing prolapse repairs, both native tissue and mesh-augmented, that utilized vaginal, open abdominal, and laparoscopic approaches. We observed shifts from native tissue repairs to mesh-augmented laparoscopic repairs over time. POP recurrence occurred in 12% of subjects overall, 15% after vaginal and 10% after abdominal prolapse repairs. While meta-analysis identified higher recurrence rates after vaginal delivery (15%) than cesarean section (10%), due to small study numbers, multiple confounders, and heterogeneity between studies, no significant differences in recurrence rates could be identified between vaginal and abdominal surgical approaches, utilization of mesh augmentation, or mode of delivery. CONCLUSION: Although literature on pregnancy following uterine-sparing POP repair is limited, available data suggest that prolapse recurrence after pregnancy and delivery remains similar to that after prolapse repair without subsequent pregnancies with few documented perinatal complications. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42021247722.

Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy versus vaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy as treatment for uterine descent: comparison of long-term outcomes.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a frequent occurring health issue, especially concerning elderly women. The objective of this study is to examine the long-term outcomes of laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy (LSH) and vaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSHP) for treatment of uterine prolapse. METHODS: A retrospective study of patients who underwent a LSH or SSHP. Validated questionnaires and an outpatient examination visit were used to investigate the effects of both surgical treatments. The primary outcome was the composite outcome of success for the apical compartment, defined as no recurrence of uterine prolapse (POP-Q measurement C ≤ 0), no subjective recurrence of POP, and/or not requiring therapy for recurrent prolapse. Secondary outcomes were peri- and postoperative data, anatomical failure, prolapse beyond hymen, subjective outcomes, and disease-specific quality of life. RESULTS: We included 105 patients, 53 in the LSH group and 52 in the SSHP group. The overall response rate of the questionnaires was 83% (n = 87) after a mean follow-up time of 4.5 years (54.2 months; 95% CI 44.8-64.2 months) in the LSH group and 2.5 years (30.1 months; 95% CI 29.3-31.5 months) in the SSHP group. There were no clinically relevant differences between the study groups in composite outcome of success (p = 0.073), anatomical failure of the apical compartment (p = 0.711), vaginal bulge symptoms for which patients consulted professionals (p = 0.126), and patient satisfaction (p = 0.741). The operative time was longer in the LSH group (117 min; interquartile range (IQR) 110-123) compared to the SSHP group (67 minutes; IQR 60-73) (p < 0.001). The duration of hospital stay was also longer in the LSH group (4 days) than in the SSHP group (3 days) (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: LSH and SSHP seem to be equally effective after long-term follow-up in treating uterine prolapse in terms of objective and subjective recurrence.

A systematic review of the surgical management of apical pelvic organ prolapse.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: This systematic review (PROSPERO:CRD42022275789) is aimed at comparing qualitatively the success, recurrence, and complication rates of sacrocolpopexy with concomitant hysterectomy, hysteropexy, sacrospinous fixation (SSF) with and without vaginal hysterectomy (VH) and uterosacral fixation (USF) with and without VH. METHODS: A systematic search was performed using Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases for studies published from 2011, on women with apical pelvic organ prolapse requiring surgical interventions. Risk of bias was assessed via the National Institutes of Health study quality assessment tool. The primary outcomes are the success and recurrence rate of each technique, for ≥12 months' follow-up. Findings were summarised qualitatively. RESULTS: A total of 21 studies were included. Overall significant findings for a high success and low recurrence rate are summarised as: minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy (MISC) is superior to abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC); sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSHP) is superior to USF + VH, which is superior to uterosacral hysteropexy and mesh hysteropexy (MHP). Significant findings related to complications include: MISC recorded a lower overall complication rate than ASC except in mesh exposure; USF + VH tends to perform better than SSHP and SSF, with SSHP performing better than MHP in faecal incontinence and overactive bladder rates. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence to conclude that hysterectomy is superior to uterine-sparing approaches. MISC should be considered over ASC given similar efficacy and reduced complications. Superiority of MHP is unproven against native tissue hysteropexy. Further studies under standardised settings are required for direct comparisons between the surgical management methods.

Reoperation for prolapse recurrence after sacrospinous mesh hysteropexy: characteristics of women choosing retreatment.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Factors that contribute to reoperation and surgical approaches for the management of recurrent uterovaginal prolapse after vaginal mesh hysteropexy (mesh hysteropexy) are unknown. We aimed to describe surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse recurrence after vaginal mesh hysteropexy, and patient characteristics in those who chose reoperation. METHODS: This is a descriptive analysis of women who experienced treatment failure within 5 years of mesh hysteropexy in a multi-site randomized trial. The composite definition of treatment failure included retreatment (pessary or reoperation), prolapse beyond the hymen, or bothersome prolapse symptoms. Characteristics of those pursuing and not pursuing repeat prolapse surgery, measures of prolapse, and symptom severity are described. RESULTS: Over 5-year follow up, 31/91 (34%) of the hysteropexy group met treatment failure criteria. All seven women who pursued reoperation reported bothersome prolapse symptoms; six were anatomic failures. Most seeking reoperation were early treatment failures; six (86%) by the 12-month visit and all by the 18-month visit. Compared to those electing expectant management, those pursuing reoperation had more apical prolapse, POP-Q point C median (IQR) -5.5 (-6.0, -4.0) cm versus +1.0 (-1.0, 3.0) cm respectively. Hysterectomy was performed in 6/7 reoperations (three vaginal, three endoscopic), with apical suspension in 5/6 hysterectomies. One participant with posterior compartment prolapse underwent transvaginal enterocele plication, uterosacral ligament suspension with posterior colpoperineorrhaphy. At a mean surgical follow-up of 34.3 (15.8) months, all women remained without anatomic or symptomatic failure. CONCLUSIONS: When recurrent prolapse after mesh hysteropexy occurred, most women did not choose reoperation. Those who pursued surgery experienced more significant apical prolapse and were universally symptomatic. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: NCT01802281.

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

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the long-term outcomes and complications of 3 different variants of laparoscopic sacropexy. DESIGN: Single-center retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A tertiary university hospital. PATIENTS: 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). INTERVENTIONS: Demographic data, Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification scores, questionnaire results, surgical conditions, postoperative outcomes, and complications were all extracted from medical and follow-up records. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.

Long-term safety and efficacy of non-absorbable abdominal mesh for apical prolapse surgery: A 10-year experience at Tertiary Care Hospital.

Objectives: To evaluate the complications of apical prolapse correction with abdominally placed mesh and to assess the long-term efficacy of Sacrohysteropexy and Sacrocolpopexy. Method: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Aga Khan University Hospital. All women who underwent apical prolapse surgery using abdominal mesh from January 2010 to December 2019 at AKUH were included. Patients with missing routine follow up visits and incomplete data up to one year post op were excluded. Patient notes were reviewed, and subjective and objective success and complications were analyzed. Safety was measured by incidence of intra, early and late postoperative complications and mesh-related complications of both procedures at two weeks, six months, twelve months, postoperatively. Results: A total of 69 cases were retrieved from the database with a mean age of 46.97 ± 13.86 years. It was found that 14 (20.3%) patients had wound infection while six (8.7%) patients developed urinary tract infections. In a median follow-up of 12 months, three patients developed mesh erosion as a complication, with an incidence of 4.3%. Two required surgical excision of the mesh and the third was successfully managed conservatively with topical estrogen and oral antibiotics. Extremely significant improvements were observed in POPDI-six scores six months postoperatively (p=0.0001). Conclusion: The present study signifies the use of abdominally placed mesh in patients with pelvic organ prolapse indicating significant improvement in Pelvic Organ Prolapse-associated symptoms postoperatively.

Development and validation of the Value of Uterus instrument and visual analog scale to measure patients' valuation of their uterus.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there are no clear frameworks or tools to objectively or subjectively evaluate patient attitudes toward uterine preservation and how they influence the decision to proceed with hysterectomy vs uterine preservation when undergoing prolapse surgery. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a reliable and valid instrument to measure patients' valuation of their uterus. STUDY DESIGN: The Value of Uterus instrument was developed on the basis of existing literature and created with structured patient-reported outcome measurement development methodology. An initial 14-question instrument was administered to 152 patients, and the instrument was revised on the basis of an analysis of internal consistency. The resulting Value of Uterus instrument has 6 items and includes a visual analog scale for the question "How important is it to you to keep your uterus when you have a gynecologic condition?" To validate the instrument, we recruited 51 patients aged >45 years with uterovaginal prolapse who presented to the urogynecology department and were scheduled to undergo vaginal surgery with or without hysterectomy. Internal reliability of the instrument was measured with Cronbach alpha. For known-groups validity, Value of Uterus summary scores were compared between women who underwent hysteropexy and those who underwent hysterectomy using the t test. Intraclass correlation coefficient was used to assess test-retest reliability with Value of Uterus administered to women twice. Lastly, a receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis was conducted to identify a cutoff Value of Uterus and visual analog scale score for predicting whether a woman would undergo hysteropexy (vs hysterectomy). RESULTS: A total of 51 patients were recruited (26 patients in the hysterectomy and 25 in the hysteropexy group), with a mean age of 64±10 years; 87.8% of patients self-identified as White. There were no differences in demographics between the groups. Cronbach's alpha was 0.94, suggesting excellent internal consistency of the items in the Value of Uterus instrument. The Value of Uterus instrument was highly correlated with the visual analog scale question, with r=0.82 (95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.89; P<.001). Patients in the hysteropexy group had significantly higher Value of Uterus scores (indicating greater value placed on the uterus) than women who underwent hysterectomy (20.8 vs 12.2; P<.001). Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis identified a Value of Uterus cutoff score ≥14, with good accuracy for predicting hysteropexy (area under the curve, 0.87; sensitivity, 92.0%; specificity, 68%). CONCLUSION: Value of Uterus is a reliable and valid 6-item instrument that measures patients' valuation of the uterus and preferences for uterine preservation when undergoing surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Value of Uterus and visual analog scale were shown to reliably predict whether a patient undergoes uterine-preserving prolapse surgery. The Value of Uterus instrument and visual analog scale tool can be useful tools to ensure that the patient's preferences are included in the medical decision-making. Value of Uterus may be useful for future research in other gynecologic conditions where uterine preservation is an option.