Medium-term outcomes 2 years after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a retrospective cohort study in Japan

Abstract

This study was performed to investigate medium-term outcomes and reoperation rates after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC). We examined 119 patients undergoing LSC for symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The primary outcomes were subjective failure and anatomical failure at 2 years; a score ≥ 2 on question 3 of the PFDI-20 was considered to indicate subjective failure. POP-Q stage 2 or higher in any compartment was considered to indicate anatomical failure. Secondary outcomes were reoperations for POP recurrence, mesh-related complications, and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The rates of subjective failure and anatomical failure were 4.2% (n = 5) and 9.2% (n = 11), respectively. Reoperations were needed in 13.4% (n = 16) of patients, including SUI with tape procedure in 7.5% (n = 9), POP recurrence in 4.2% (n = 5), and mesh-related complications in 1.6% (n = 2). The subjective failure rate at 2 years after LSC was acceptably low.

Impact Statement

• What is already known on this subject? Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) has clinical efficacy equivalent to open sacrocolpopexy, and there is evidence that LSC involves less blood loss and shorter length of hospital stay. However, there is still insufficient evidence to assess medium-term outcomes after LSC in Japan.

• What the results of this study revealed? The findings of this study showed excellent medium-term rates of subjective failure (4.2%) and anatomical failure (8.4%) after LSC. We demonstrated that patients with persistent postoperative vaginal bulge (subjective failure) also had no improvement in postoperative urinary and colorectal symptoms. Our cohort had low rates of reoperation (13.4%) after LSC. The most common reoperations were for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) (7.5%), followed by pelvic organ prolapse (POP) recurrence (4.2%) and mesh-related complications (1.6%).

• What are the implications of these findings in clinical practice and/or further research? This study showed that LSC is a safe and effective treatment for POP. Comparative evaluation of anatomical outcomes and the patient’s condition is required to understand the extent to which LSC positively impacts a woman’s pelvic floor-related quality of life.

Keywords:

• Pelvic organ prolapse
• laparoscopic
• medium-term outcomes
• reoperation
• complication
• quality of life

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dolphin Corp. for English language review.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest related to this study.

Data availability statement

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the present study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.