Hysterectomy with uterosacral suspension or Uphold™ hysteropexy in women with apical prolapse: a parallel cohort study.

Abstract

The aim was to compare objective and subjective cure rates between Uphold™ hysteropexy (HP) and vaginal hysterectomy (VH) with uterosacral suspension. A sample size of 49 in each arm would be required to detect a clinical difference of 20% between the groups. Owing to delayed recruitment, this originally planned randomised controlled trial was changed to a patient preference study after randomising initial 6 participants. Women with symptomatic stage ≥2 uterine descent wishing a surgical solution were included. Routine follow-up was scheduled at 6weeks, 6months, 12months, and annually thereafter. Primary outcome was absence of stage ≥2 apical prolapse. Secondary outcomes included a composite cure of no leading edge beyond the hymen, absence of bulge symptoms and no retreatment; patient-reported outcomes were based on quality-of-life questionnaires (PFDI-20, PFIQ-7, PISQ-12, PGI-I, EQ5D and a health score). We recruited 50 patients undergoing VH between 2011 and 2013 and 51 patients undergoing HP between 2011 and 2016. Participants were followed up for a median of 25months (23-96). Five women from the VH (10%) and 7 from the HP (14%) group were lost to follow-up. Combined anatomical and symptomatic outcomes were available for 41 (82%) VH and 39 (76%) in the HP group. There was no difference in objective apical outcomes; the incidence of stage 2 prolapse was 0% in the VH group and 2% in HP group (p= 0.50). We found no difference in the composite cure rate (78% VH vs 85% HP, 0.45) between the groups. There was no significant difference in surgical complications (p= 0.33), assessed using Clavien-Dindo classification. There was a 2% surgery rate for mesh exposure in the HP group. Uphold™ uterine suspension and VH appear to have similar objective and subjective cure at 25months, with no significant difference in surgical complications.