These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Laparoscopic Uterosacral Ligament Hysteropexy vs Total Vaginal Hysterectomy with Uterosacral Ligament Suspension for Anterior and Apical Prolapse: Surgical Outcome and Patient Satisfaction.
    Author: Haj-Yahya R, Chill HH, Levin G, Reuveni-Salzman A, Shveiky D.
    Journal: J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2020 Jan; 27(1):88-93. PubMed ID: 30802607.
    Abstract:
    STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare anatomic and clinical cure rates as well as patient satisfaction between uterine-preserving laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension and total vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension in women with apical and anterior prolapse. DESIGN: Single-center clinical comparative retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery service at a tertiary teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Women with pelvic organ prolapse who underwent surgical treatment for their condition between July 2010 and December 2015. INTERVENTIONS: All women underwent laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension or total vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension for apical and anterior prolapse. Concomitant procedures included anterior and posterior repair, as well as a midurethral sling when indicated. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Preoperative and postoperative Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) measurements were obtained. The primary outcome was clinical cure rate. Secondary outcomes included anatomic cure rate and outcomes of site-specific POP-Q points Ba, C, and Bp for the whole cohort. Patient satisfaction was measured using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement questionnaire. During the study period, 106 women underwent transvaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension, and 53 women had laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension. At a mean follow-up of 14.7 ± 13.23 months for the vaginal group and 17.5 ± 15.84 months for the laparoscopic group (p = .29), there were significant improvements of POP-Q points Ba, C, and Bp (p < .0001 for all comparisons in both groups). The clinical cure rate was 96% in the vaginal group and 98% in the laparoscopic group (p = .50). The anatomic cure rate was 85.4% in the vaginal group and 93.75% in the laparoscopic group (p = .11) Patient satisfaction was high in both groups. CONCLUSION: In appropriately selected patients, laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension is a valid uterus-preserving option for women with anterior and apical prolapse, associated with high anatomic and clinical cure rates and patient satisfaction.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]