Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 15, 2026
03:30
Laparoscopic Non-Mesh Cerclage Pectopexy with Uterine Preservation for Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Published on: October 25, 2024
Implementation of a new procedure: laparoscopic versus robotic sacrocolpopexy
Nibal Awad1, Suzana Mustafa, Amnon Amit
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rambam Health Care, Ruth and Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion, Haifa, Israel.
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
|January 1, 2013
Summary
Robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) are feasible for vaginal apex prolapse. RSC offers reduced bleeding and shorter hospital stays compared to LSC.
Area of Science:
- Urogynecology
- Minimally Invasive Surgery
Background:
- Vaginal apex prolapse is a common condition requiring surgical intervention.
- Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) and robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) are surgical options.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the implementation and learning curves of LSC and RSC for vaginal apex prolapse.
- To evaluate intraoperative bleeding, operative time, and hospitalization between LSC and RSC.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of the first 40 LSC and 40 RSC procedures.
- Primary outcomes: intraoperative bleeding, operative time, hospitalization.
- Secondary outcomes: surgical complications.
Main Results:
- RSC demonstrated significantly less blood loss (48 ml vs. 206 ml) and shorter hospital stays (2.4 days vs. 3.8 days) compared to LSC.
- Operative times were similar between groups (186 min for RSC vs. 176 min for LSC).
- Complication rates were low and comparable between LSC and RSC.
Conclusions:
- Both RSC and LSC are viable surgical options for vaginal apex prolapse with acceptable complication rates.
- RSC allows for more anatomical operating with reduced blood loss.
