Outcome of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with anterior and posterior mesh

The assessment of the postoperative outcome following laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy using anterior and posterior mesh.

In the study were included one hundred and ten women (mean age 62 years with range from 34 to 78) who had laparoscopic sarcoplexy the period 2001-2005. They were contacted and completed postal questionnaires more than one year after surgery and had a follow up in the uro-gynaecology clinic.

The median follow up was 21 months. Eighty-three of them (75.4%) answered the postal questionnaire. Good satisfaction was defined as complete disappearance of all genito-urinary symptoms. Moderate satisfaction was defined as a partial disappearance of symptoms, or de novo less annoying symptoms. Dissatisfaction was defined as no change in symptoms, and /or de novo important symptoms. The overall rate of good satisfaction was 74.7% (62/83), moderate satisfaction 15.6% (13/83), and only 9.6% (8/83) were not satisfied. There was no statistical difference among the six different groups (sacrocolpopexy only, plus TVT, plus TVT and hysterectomy, sacrocolpopexy and previous hysterectomy, sacrocolpopexy and TVT with previous hysterectomy), concerning the pre and post operative clinical signs and post operative symptoms. There was a statistically significant difference (p=0.038) regarding dissatisfaction and prolapse relapse between the group that had a previous total hysterectomy combining sacrocolpopexy with TVT and all other groups. The most frequent post operative symptoms were stress incontinence, dysuria and constipation. No severe complications and mesh erosion were observed, despite the two cases of mesh detachment.

Laparoscopic double synthetic mesh sacrocolpopexy seems to be a safe and effective treatment of genitourinary prolapse, with good overall long term outcomes and benefits of the minimal access approach. The presence of the remaining cervix after subtotal hysterectomy, seems to enhance the results of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.. Further randomised studies are needed to confirm our results and to compare this method to open and/or vaginal approach.