Vaginally-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterosacropexy for Advanced Utero-Vaginal Prolapse: A Series of 32 Cases

Open access


Advanced utero-vaginal prolapse is a frequent condition in the aging female population and several strategies aimed at its treatment have been developed. In order to demonstrate the importance of using the vaginal route in assistance to laparoscopic hysterosacropexy, a retrospective case series was designed, comparing thirty-two patients diagnosed with stage III-IV uterovaginal prolapse according to the POP-Q system. The patients were treated between 2006-2011 using one of two methods of hysterosacropexy: vaginally assisted laparoscopic hysterosacropexy (VALHS) in 18 cases and total laparoscopic hysterosacropexy (LHS) in 14 cases. The choice of method was based on the primary mechanism of central compartment prolapse. The total operative time, the time required for mesh fixation at the cervix and sacrum, the cure rate of prolapse and the rate of re-operation for prolapse were statistically analyzed for both LHS and VALHS and compared between these two procedures by Student T-Test. The main outcome parameters were related to the operative method. The total operative time proved to be equal for both procedures, although the time necessary to attach the mesh to the cervical ring was shorter in VALHS. Therefore, the combination of the vaginal and laparoscopic routes yields a minimally invasive variant of sacropexy with as short an operative time as possible. The vaginal route offers a safe alternative for suturing the mesh and treating concurrent vaginal wall prolapse, while laparoscopy reduces the inherent risks of open abdominal surgery.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Pantazis K. Freeman R. Thomson A. Frappell J. & Bombieri L. (2008). Results from the LAS Trial an RCT comparing open abdominal to laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of post hysterectomy vault prolapse. International Urogynecology Journal. 19 Suppl 1 101-102. Abstract number 120

  • 2. Nichols D.H. & Randal C.L. (1989). Vaginal surgery. Third edition. Philadelphia PA: Lippincott Williams&Wilkins

  • 3. Porges R. (2008). Abnormalities of pelvic support. Glob. libr. women's med. (ISSN: 1756-2228); DOI 10.3843/GLOWM.10056

  • 4. Bonney V. (1934). The principles that should underlie all operations for prolapse. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Emp. 41 669-703

  • 5. Godin P.A. Nisolle M. Smets M. Squifet J. & and Donnez J. (1999). Combined vaginal and laparoscopic sacrofxation for genital prolapse using a tacking technique: a series of 45 cases. Gynaecol Endosc. 8 277-285

  • 6. Culligan P.J. Murphy M. Blackwell L. Hammons G. Graham C. & Heit M.H. (2002). Long-term success of abdominal sacral colpopexy using synthetic mesh. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 187 1473-82

  • 7. Benson J.T. Lucente V. & McClellen E. (1996). Vaginal versus abdominal reconstructive surgery for the treatment of pelvic support defects: a prospective randomized study with long-term outcome evaluation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 175 1418-22

  • 8. Diwadkar G.B. Barber M.D. Feiner B. Maher C. & Jelovsek J.E. (2009). Complication and reoperation rates after apical vaginal prolapse surgical repair: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 113 367-373

  • 9. Cosson M. Occelli B. Narducci F. Ego A. Querleu D. & Crepin G. (2000). Causes of Failure of Abdominal Colposacropexy for the Treatment of Genital and Vaginal Vault Prolapse. J Gynecol Surg. 16 141

  • 10. Rooney K. Kenton K. Mueller E.R. FitzGerald M.P. & Brubaker L. (2006). Advanced anterior vaginal wall prolapse is highly correlated with apical prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 195 1837-1840

  • 11. Paraiso M.F.R. Walters M.D. Rackley R.R. Melek S. & Hugney C. (2005). Laparoscopic and open sacral colpopexies: a cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 192 1752-1758

  • 12. Hsiao K.C. Latchamsetty K. Govier F.E. Kozlowski P. & Kobashi K.C. (2007). Comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. J Endourol. 21 926-930

  • 13. Ross J.W. & Preston M. (2005). Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for severe vaginal vault prolapse: five-year outcome. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 12 221-226

  • 14. Sarlos D. Brandner S. Kots L. Gygax N. & Schaer G. (2008). Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for uterine and posthysterectomy prolapse: anatomical results quality of life and perioperative outcome - a prospective study with 101 cases. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 19:1415-1422

  • 15. Leron E. & Stanton S.L. (2001). Sacrohysteropexy with synthetic mesh for the management of uterovaginal prolapse. Brit J Obstet Gynecol. 108 629-633

Journal information
Cited By
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 149 86 5
PDF Downloads 66 51 2