Anand, Mallika

Objectives The aim of this work was to determine the degree of symptom relief and survival free of retreatment after Mayo-McCall culdoplasty (MMC), open abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC), and robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) for posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse. Methods We retrospectively studied patients who had undergone surgery for posthysterectomy apical vaginal prolapse from January 1, 2000, through June 30, 2012, at our institution. Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes were abstracted from electronic health records. Cross-sectional data for current pelvic floor symptoms were collected by using validated questionnaires. Survival free of retreatment was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. To account for selection bias, adjusted analyses using inverse probability weighting (IPW) were performed to compare outcomes for MMC versus ASC, MMC versus RSC, and ASC versus RSC. Results Of 512 patients, 337 completed at least a validated or abbreviated questionnaire. Among MMC, ASC, and RSC groups, overall Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20, Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire Short Form 7, and Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire 12 summary scores were not significantly different. There was no significant difference in 5-year survival free of retreatment for MMC (94.0%) versus RSC (95.5%) and ASC (94.8%) versus RSC (92.1%). However, patients who had MMC were more likely to have retreatment than patients who had ASC during the first 10 years (10-year survival free of retreatment: 81.1% vs 95.4%; hazard ratio, 3.68 [95% confidence interval, 1.51–8.98]); the 10-year data were not available for RSC comparisons, given the later initiation of RSC. Conclusions Symptom relief was comparable after MMC, ASC, and RSC. Among all groups, most patients were free of retreatment for prolapse at 5 years. Between the MMC and ASC groups, survival free of retreatment (%) within 10 years was still favorable, but ASC had greater durability, particularly after accounting for selection bias.

Objectives To determine the rate of perioperative complications and cost associated with Mayo-McCall culdoplasty (MMC), open abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC), and robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) for posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse. Methods We retrospectively searched for the records of patients undergoing posthysterectomy apical vaginal prolapse surgery (MMC, ASC, or RSC) between January 1, 2000, and June 30, 2012, at our institution. For all patients identified, perioperative complications, length of hospital stay, and inpatient costs to patients were abstracted from the medical records and compared by procedure. Inverse–probability-of-procedure weighting using propensity scores was used to obtain less-biased comparisons of outcomes between procedures. Results A total of 512 patients met the inclusion criteria (174 MMC, 237 ASC, and 101 RSC). Using inverse-probability weighting, the MMC group had a significantly lower intraoperative complication rate (3.3% vs 11.6% for ASC, 3.4% vs 24.1% for RSC), median operative time (94 vs 217 min for ASC, 100 vs 228 min for RSC), and median cost (US $8,776 vs $12,695 for ASC, US $8,773 vs $13,107 for RSC) than the ASC and RSC groups (all P < 0.01). In addition, the MMC group had significantly fewer postoperative grade 3+ complications than the RSC group (1.1% vs 9.4%, P < 0.01). Conclusions In the treatment of posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse, MMC is associated with decreased non–urinary tract infection, less perioperative morbidity, and lower cost to patients compared with sacrocolpopexy.

Objective The optimal suture selection for mesh attachment during robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) is currently unknown. Here, we sought to evaluate the outcomes of RSC using absorbable sutures for vaginal and sacral mesh attachment. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 132 RSC surgeries that were performed for vaginal vault prolapse in the Division of Gynecologic Surgery at our institution from February 2007 to December 2013. All cases were performed with absorbable suture (polyglactin) for vaginal and sacral mesh fixation. Sacrocolpopexy failure was defined as patients undergoing either repeat prolapse surgery or pessary use for recurrent prolapse. The durability of RSC was assessed via Kaplan-Meier method. Results The median age at surgery was 61.1 years (interquartile range [IQR], 55.6–68.2) and the median length of postoperative follow-up was 33 months (IQR, 15.7–57). The median body mass index was 26.5 kg/m2 (IQR, 24.3–29.7). During follow-up, 10 patients underwent prolapse retreatment. There were 2 apical recurrences, 4 distal anterior recurrences, 2 posterior recurrences, and, in 2 cases, the location was unknown. One apical recurrence was confirmed to be secondary to detachment of the mesh from the sacral promontory. Among those with recurrence, the median time to recurrence was 15.5 months (IQR, 4.22–35.9). Overall, the 1-year and 3-year freedom from repeat surgery rates were 96% and 93%, respectively. Conclusions With a median follow-up of 33 months, the use of absorbable suture for both vaginal and sacral attachments during RSC is effective. Further studies evaluating suture selection and mesh attachment techniques for RSC are needed.

Objectives This study aimed to determine factors influencing the selection of Mayo-McCall culdoplasty (MMC), open abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC), or robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) for posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse. Methods We retrospectively searched for the records of patients undergoing posthysterectomy apical vaginal prolapse surgery between January 1, 2000, and June 30, 2012, at our institution. Baseline characteristics and explicit selection factors were abstracted from the electronic medical records. Factors were compared between groups using χ2 tests for categorical variables, analysis of variance for continuous variables, and Kruskal-Wallis tests for ordinal variables. Results Among the 512 patients identified who met inclusion criteria, the MMC group (n = 174) had more patients who were older, had American Society of Anesthesiologists class 3+ or greater, had anterior vaginal prolapse grade 3+, desired to avoid abdominal surgery, and did not desire a functional vagina. Patients in the ASC (n = 237) and RSC (n = 101) groups had more failed prolapse surgeries, suspected abdominopelvic pathologic processes, and chronic pain. Advanced prolapse was more frequently cited as an explicit selection factor for ASC than for either MMC or RSC. Conclusions The most common factors that influenced the type of apical vaginal vault prolapse surgery overlapped with characteristics that differed at baseline. In general, MMC was chosen for advanced anterior vaginal prolapse and baseline characteristics that increased surgical risks, ASC for advanced apical prolapse, and ASC or RSC for recurrent prolapse, suspected abdominal pathology, and patients with chronic pain or lifestyles including heavy lifting. Thus, efforts should be made to attempt to control for selection bias when comparing these procedures.