1891 A Prospective, Controlled Study Comparing Single Port Laparoscopic Sacrospinous Fixation and Transvaginal Sacrospinous Fixation in the Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Abstract

Study Objective The objective of the study was to compare operative time, intraoperative blood loss, recurrence and complication rates for single port laparoscopic sacrospinous fixation SSF and transvaginal (SSF) for the primary treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Design Patients undergoing surgery for pelvic organ prolapse were included in a randomized, controlled study comparing single port laparoscopic SSF or transvaginal sacrospinous fixation. The examination included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, operative complication, and pelvic organ prolapse quantification, urodynamics, ultrasound, and quality-of-life (QoL) questionnaires before and 3 and 12 months after surgery. Setting trendelenburg. Patients or Participants Of 20 randomized patients in Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, from Jan.2018 to Mar.2019. Interventions 10 patients underwent single port laparoscopic SSF and 10 patients underwent transvaginal SSF. Measurements and Main Results All the operations were completed successfully. The operative time in the single port laparoscopic group (117.0±20.0 min) was longer than the transvaginal group (75.2±24.3 min). The intraoperative blood loss (54.9±24.1 ml) was less than the transvaginal group (87.6±12.3 min). The incidence of operative complications in the single port laparoscopic group (30.0%) was lower than transvaginal group (50.0%). There were no difference between the single port laparoscopic group and the transvaginal group in prolapse recurrence after 12 months occurred (P >0.05). No difference in QoL improvement as well as of de novo stress urinary incontinence and overactive bladder onset was found. Conclusion Single port laparoscopic sacrospinous fixation is safe and feasible in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. The objective of the study was to compare operative time, intraoperative blood loss, recurrence and complication rates for single port laparoscopic sacrospinous fixation SSF and transvaginal (SSF) for the primary treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Patients undergoing surgery for pelvic organ prolapse were included in a randomized, controlled study comparing single port laparoscopic SSF or transvaginal sacrospinous fixation. The examination included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, operative complication, and pelvic organ prolapse quantification, urodynamics, ultrasound, and quality-of-life (QoL) questionnaires before and 3 and 12 months after surgery. trendelenburg. Of 20 randomized patients in Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, from Jan.2018 to Mar.2019. 10 patients underwent single port laparoscopic SSF and 10 patients underwent transvaginal SSF. All the operations were completed successfully. The operative time in the single port laparoscopic group (117.0±20.0 min) was longer than the transvaginal group (75.2±24.3 min). The intraoperative blood loss (54.9±24.1 ml) was less than the transvaginal group (87.6±12.3 min). The incidence of operative complications in the single port laparoscopic group (30.0%) was lower than transvaginal group (50.0%). There were no difference between the single port laparoscopic group and the transvaginal group in prolapse recurrence after 12 months occurred (P >0.05). No difference in QoL improvement as well as of de novo stress urinary incontinence and overactive bladder onset was found. Single port laparoscopic sacrospinous fixation is safe and feasible in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.