Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

A pilot study on vaginally assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for patients with uterovaginal prolapse.

OBJECTIVES: : The primary objective of this pilot study was to compare the short-term anatomic outcomes and complication rates of vaginally assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (VALS) with those of conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LS) in patients undergoing concurrent hysterectomy. The secondary objective was to compare operative times of the 2 different techniques.

METHODS: : This is a retrospective pilot study comparing VALS-a method using transvaginal mesh attachment to the vaginal apex-to conventional LS in patients undergoing concurrent hysterectomy.

RESULTS: : Forty-four women underwent VALS, and 26 women underwent LS. There was no significant difference in intraoperative complication rates (2.3% vs 3.8%, not statistically significant), postoperative complication rates (4.5% vs 0.0%, P = 0.526), mesh extrusion rates (2.3% vs 0%, not statistically significant), or postoperative pelvic organ prolapse quantification scores. The mean total operative time was 55 minutes shorter for the VALS group (215.2 [SD, 41.0] minutes) than the LS group (269.7 [SD, 55.6] minutes; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: : There was no significant difference in short-term anatomic outcomes or complication rates between groups. Vaginally assisted LS was associated with significantly shorter operative times than conventional LS.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app