Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 15, 2025

Development of a Uterosacral Ligament Suspension Rat Model
Published on: August 17, 2022
Is absorbable suture superior to permanent suture for uterosacral ligament suspension?
Liao Peng1, Yu-Hao Liu2, Shi-Xin He3
1Department of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Aims:
The aims of this study were to compare surgical results and suture-related complications after uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS) with absorbable suture (AS) vs permanent suture (PS).
Methods:
We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, clinicalTrial.gov, and Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials for articles that compared AS with PS for USLS. The primary outcomes were surgical success rate and suture-related complications (suture exposure/erosion and suture removal). Review Manager 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) was applied to conduct all analyses.
Results:
Four articles involving 647 patients were eventually included. Our findings demonstrated that AS had a similar surgical success rates in comparison with PS (RR = 1.00; 95% CI, 0.94-1.06) and that no significant differences in anatomic failure rates were noted between two groups (RR = 1.10; 95% CI, 0.65-1.86). Subgroup analyses in anatomic failure revealed no statistical differences in apical prolapse ≥1/2 TVL (RR = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.48-1.75), recurrent prolapse beyond the hymen (RR = 1.18; 95% CI, 0.68-2.04), as well as in recurrent anterior, posterior or apical prolapse (P = .14, P = .08, P = .09, respectively). However, AS group indicated a lower risk in suture exposure/erosion (RR = 0.31; 95% CI, 0.15-0.63) and lower suture removal rate (RR = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.18-0.67).
Conclusions:
Due to similar surgical results, less suture exposure/erosion and less suture removal, the current data supported that AS is as effective as PS, but with a better safety profile.

