Transvaginal single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a retrospective cohort study

被引:6
|
作者
Li, Junwei [1 ]
Sima, Yizhen [1 ]
Hu, Changdong [1 ]
Wang, Xiaojuan [1 ]
Lu, Zhiying [1 ]
Hua, Keqin [1 ]
Chen, Yisong [1 ]
机构
[1] Fudan Univ, Dept Gynecol, Obstet & Gynecol Hosp, 128 Shenyang Rd, Shanghai 200090, Peoples R China
关键词
Transvaginal single-port laparoscopy; Sacrocolpopexy; Pelvic organ prolapse; Mesh; SYMPTOMS; REPAIR;
D O I
10.1186/s12893-022-01535-w
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Sacrocolpopexy is the gold standard treatment for apical prolapse. With the development of minimally invasive surgical techniques, the new approach of transvaginal single-port laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (TS-LSC) has become available. However, its therapeutic effects remain unclear. The aim of this study is to compare the middle-term clinical outcomes of transvaginal single-port laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with multi-port laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) for apical prolapse. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study. Patients with advanced apical prolapse who underwent either TS-LSC or LSC between May 2017 to June 2019 were enrolled. Baseline demographics, perioperative results, perioperative and postoperative complications, pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POPQ) scores, pelvic floor distress inventory (PFDI-20) score and pelvic organ prolapse/urinary incontinence sexual function questionnaire (PISQ-12) score were collected at 2 years. Results 89 subjects were analyzed: 46 in TS-LSC and 43 in LSC group. Follow-up time was 38.67 +/- 7.46 vs 41.81 +/- 7.13 months, respectively. Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes were similar except that pain score was lower (2.37 +/- 0.90 vs 3.74 +/- 1.05) and cosmetic score was higher (9.02 +/- 0.75 vs 7.21 +/- 0.89) in TS-LSC group (P < 0.05). Complication rates did not differ between groups. 3 mesh exposure in each group were noted. Recurrence rate was 2.17% in TS-LSC and 6.98% in LSC, no apical recurrence occurred. Constipation was the most common postoperative symptom. Besides, patients in TS-LSC group had better POP-Q C point (- 6.83 +/- 0.54 vs - 6.39 +/- 0.62, P < 0.05), and similar Aa, Ap and TVL values. Bladder and pelvic symptoms were improved in both groups, but colorectal symptoms were not relieved. There were no differences of PISQ-12 scores between groups. Conclusion TS-LSC was not inferior to LSC at 2 years. Patients may benefit from its mild pain, better cosmetic effect and better apical support as well as good safety and efficacy. TS-LSC is a promising considerable choice for advanced vaginal apical prolapse. Trial registration ChiCTR2000032334, 2020-4-26 (retrospectively registered)
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Long-term Experience of Single-port and Multi-port Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy in a Single Center
    Lee, J. U. H. U. N.
    Lee, Yoon Soon
    Hong, Dae Gy
    IN VIVO, 2022, 36 (05): : 2409 - 2413
  • [22] Effectiveness and safety of single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic surgery for treating liver diseases: a meta-analysis
    Yun-Bing Wang
    Jin Xia
    Jian-Ying Zhang
    Jian-Ping Gong
    Xiao-Mei Wang
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2017, 31 : 1524 - 1537
  • [23] Effectiveness and safety of single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic surgery for treating liver diseases: a meta-analysis
    Wang, Yun-Bing
    Xia, Jin
    Zhang, Jian-Ying
    Gong, Jian-Ping
    Wang, Xiao-Mei
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2017, 31 (04): : 1524 - 1537
  • [24] Pure Single-Port Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for Early Gastric Cancer: Comparative Study with Multi-Port Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy
    Ahn, Sang-Hoon
    Son, Sang-Yong
    Jung, Do Hyun
    Park, Do Joong
    Kim, Hyung-Ho
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS, 2014, 219 (05) : 933 - 943
  • [25] Incidence of Incisional Hernias after Single-Port Versus Multi-Port Robotic Radical Prostatectomy
    Norton, J. Corbin
    Compher, Tyler
    Shumaker, Luke
    Burns, Zachary
    Nix, Jeffrey W.
    Parmar, Abhishek D.
    Rais-Bahrami, Soroush
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2025, 39 (01) : 2 - 9
  • [26] Single-incision laparoscopic abdominal cerclage placement: A retrospective study of single-port and robotic single-port versus multiport laparoscopy
    Zhang, Yiming
    Gandhi, Manisha
    Birchall, Courtney
    Guan, Xiaoming
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY & OBSTETRICS, 2018, 142 (02) : 236 - 238
  • [27] Single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic and robotic inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
    Thanawiboonchai, Theethawat
    Cyntia Lima Fonseca Rodrigues, Amanda
    Zevallos, Alba
    Shojaeian, Fatemeh
    Parker, Brett Colton
    Coker, Alisa Mae
    Deng, Hao
    Adrales, Gina Lynn
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2025, 39 (01): : 530 - 544
  • [28] Comparison of single-port and multi-port Retzius-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy
    Alexander L. Shiang
    Joshua K. Palka
    Shiva Balasubramanian
    R. Sherburne Figenshau
    Zachary L. Smith
    Eric H. Kim
    Journal of Robotic Surgery, 2023, 17 : 835 - 840
  • [29] Comparison of single-port and multi-port Retzius-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy
    Shiang, Alexander L.
    Palka, Joshua K.
    Balasubramanian, Shiva
    Figenshau, R. Sherburne
    Smith, Zachary L.
    Kim, Eric H.
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2023, 17 (03) : 835 - 840
  • [30] Single-Port Versus 4-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
    Dionigi, Gianlorenzo
    Rausei, Stefano
    Dionigi, Renzo
    Boni, Luigi
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2015, 261 (01) : E10 - E10