Laparoscopic versus abdominal sacrocolpopexy for treatment of multi-compartmental pelvic organ prolapse: A systematic review.

Abstract

Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) is attracting increasing attention as a minimally invasive surgery that provides excellent therapeutic effects on apical vaginal prolapse. However, its therapeutic effects on multi-compartmental pelvic organ prolapse (POP) remain unclear. Therefore, the aim of this review was to evaluate the efficacy of LSC on multi-compartmental POP compared with abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC). We extracted three articles on randomized controlled trials that compared LSC and ASC. A total of 247 patients (123 for LSC, 124 for ASC) were evaluated. There was no evidence of recurrence or reoperation in either group for the apical vaginal compartment. Regarding recurrence within the anterior vaginal compartment, there were no significant between-group differences in either of the two randomized controlled trials targeting vaginal vault prolapse. In contrast, in the randomized controlled trial targeting POP including cases with uteruses, there were more recurrent POP with grade II or more in the LSC group than in the ASC group (11/60 [18.3%] vs 1/60 [1.6%], P = 0.004). Reoperation for the posterior vaginal compartment was performed in three cases (2.5%) in the LSC group and in one case (0.8%) in the ASC group. The combined repeat surgery and mesh removal surgery rate was higher in the LSC group (8/119 [6.7%]) than in the ASC group (2/121 [1.7%], P = 0.049). LSC has an excellent therapeutic effect and is comparable to ASC for the treatment of apical prolapse. However, cystocele recurrence, repeat surgery of the posterior compartment, and mesh-related complications were more frequent in patients who had undergone LSC.