OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and the subjective and objective outcomes of bilateral minimal tension sacrospinous fixation for pelvic organ prolapse.
STUDY DESIGN: This was a single-centre observational study conducted at the University Hospital, Urogynaecological Unit, with a certified urogynaecological surgeon. A cohort of 110 patients receiving modified bilateral sacrospinous fixation following a diagnosis of grade II-IV pelvic organ prolapse and defects of three pelvic compartments. Non-absorbable sutures were placed on each side of the sacrospinous ligament. The main aim was to achieve a minimal tension situation by intentionally leaving suture bridges on both sides of the suspension. The post-surgical follow-up period was 14±7 months. The three characteristics of cure in functional surgery - anatomy, function, and subjective patient's judgement - were evaluated in this study. Primary outcomes were anatomic, functional, and subjective cures, that were measured pre- and postoperatively using the POP-Q system values, a validated pelvic quality-of-life questionnaire (P-QoL/D), and interviews regarding expectations, goal-setting, goal achievement, and satisfaction. Secondary outcome measures included data on surgical complications. Data analysis was performed with descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon tests, and Mann-Whitney U-tests.
RESULTS: A total of 110 patients underwent anterior and posterior colporrhaphy and minimal tension bilateral sacrospinous fixation. An objective anatomic cure was reported for 94.5% of patients, and significant improvement of all prolapse symptoms was observed following surgery (p< 0.001). Full or partial fulfilment of the criteria for a subjective cure was demonstrated in 96% of the patients. Only 5.5% of the patients experienced postoperative urinary tract infections. No other complications requiring medical or surgical interventions were reported.
CONCLUSION: Bilateral minimal tension sacrospinous fixation was associated with low morbidity, as well as excellent anatomic, functional, and subjective results at follow-up.
Written by:
Mothes AR, Wanzke L, Radosa MP, Runnebaum IB. Are you the author?
Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Bachstreet 18, D-07743 Jena, Germany.
Reference: Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015 Feb 21;188:1-5.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2015.02.022
PubMed Abstract
PMID: 25766786