Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 9, 2025
Author Spotlight: Advancing Pelvic Prolapse Treatment with a Non-Mesh Approach using Laparoscopic Pectopexy
Published on: October 25, 2024
Long-term outcomes of cable-suspended suture technique versus conventional suture for anterior vaginal wall prolapse:
Qian Hu1,2,3, Shuai Huang1,2,3, Xiaoke Yang1,2,3
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Beijing Hospital, No. 1 Dahua Road, Dongcheng District, Beijing, 100730, People's Republic of China.
Background:
Anterior colporrhaphy (AC) is a conventional surgical repair technique for cystocele but with high recurrence rate. We present a novel technique: Cable-suspended structure (CSS) by non-absorbable suture combined with "bridge" formation in surgical treatment of cystocele. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the long-term outcome of CSS technique for anterior vaginal wall repair with AC.
Methods:
A retrospective review was performed on patients who underwent anterior vaginal wall repair between January 2012 and March 2017 at our center. All the patients were under a follow-up survey. The primary outcomes were objective cure (anterior prolapse POP-Q ≤ stage 1) and subjective cure (no symptoms of bulge or retreatment for prolapse). Secondary outcomes included quality of life (QOL) and patients' satisfaction, outcomes of site-specific POP-Q points Aa, Ba and C, as well as postoperative complications.
Results:
Of 91 included participants, 43 underwent AC and 48 underwent CSS. The proportion of sarcrospinous ligament fixation in the CSS group was higher than in the AC group (81.4% vs. 77.1%, P < 0.05). At a median follow-up of 69 months, the CSS group showed significantly higher objective cure rate compared with the AC group (72.9% vs. 51.2%, odds ratio 2.57, 95%CI 1.07-6.16). After adjusting for sarcrospinous ligament fixation, the CSS group still significantly showed higher objective cure rate (adjusted odds ratio 2.88, 95%CI 1.16-7.21). The proportion of the patients with POP-Q 0 stage in the CSS group was particularly higher than the AC group (25% vs. 7.0%, P = 0.025). There was no difference between the groups with respect to subjective cure, patients' satisfaction and postoperative complication.
Conclusions:
The CSS technique showed better objective outcome than AC, however, subjective cure rate did not significantly differ between the two. Future prospective trial with large-scale should confirm the effectiveness and safety of CSS in sexually active women.
