Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 30, 2025
Development of a Uterosacral Ligament Suspension Rat Model
Published on: August 17, 2022
Absorbable versus Permanent Suture for Vaginal Uterosacral Ligament Suspension for Treatment of Apical Prolapse
Henry H Chill1, Gila Cohen-Milun2, Adiel Cohen3
1Division of Urogynecology, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Skokie, Illinois (Drs. Chill, Moss, and Winer).
Study Objective:
The aim of this study was to compare surgical outcomes in women undergoing vaginal uterosacral ligament suspension using permanent as opposed to absorbable sutures. We also aimed to assess for specific risk factors for suture complications.
Design:
Retrospective cohort study.
Setting:
Female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery unit at a university-affiliated tertiary medical center.
Patients:
Women with apical prolapse who underwent vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension during the study period.
Interventions:
none.
Measurements And Main Results:
A total of 197 women were included in the study. Of them, 118 (59.9%) underwent the procedure using a permanent suture and 79 (40.1%) using an absorbable suture. Women in the permanent suture group were less sexually active and had less prolapse of point C on pre-operative exam. With regard to intra-operative and postoperative data, women in the permanent suture group had increased frequency of concomitant procedures, regional anesthesia, surgical time, duration of hospital stay, and change in hemoglobin. Clinical, anatomical, and composite success did not differ between groups. Patient satisfaction recorded using the Patient Global of Improvement Questionnaire was similar as well. Women in the permanent suture group had a higher frequency of suture exposure compared with the absorbable suture group (9.3% vs 0.0%, p = .006). In order to assess for risk factors leading to suture complications, a comparison was performed between women who had suture exposure or granulation tissue and those who did not. Increasing parity by 1 increased the odds of having suture exposure or granulation tissue by a factor of approximately 1.2 (adjusted odds ratio = 1.24; Confidence interval, 1.05-1.47). Women with stage IV prolapse had 3.4 times the odds of suture complication compared with women with stage III prolapse (adjusted odds ratio = 3.4; Confidence interval, 1.1-10.6).
Conclusion:
Use of an absorbable suture affords comparable success and lower frequency of suture exposure compared with permanent sutures in women undergoing vaginal uterosacral ligament suspension for treatment of apical prolapse.
