Laparoscopic correction methods of pelvic organ prolapse
DOI: 10.32364/2618-8430-2024-7-1-3
A.N. Pyatkina, D.V. Bryunin, Yu.V. Chushkov
I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russian Federation
Aim: to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combined technique — pectopexy, and the most common — laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse correction.
Patients and Methods: the study included 32 female patients with a similar nosological form of pelvic organ prolapse. All the subjects were divided into two groups depending on the surgical treatment method. Group 1 (main group) included 14 female patients who had a combined laparoscopic correction of pelvic organ prolapse with transverse and longitudinal fixation of synthetic implants — combined pectopexy. Group 2 (control group) included 18 female patients who underwent sacrocolpopexy. Comprehensive clinical and instrumental examination of female patients was performed before and within 24 months after surgery.
Results: there were no intraoperative complications in female patients of both groups. In all cases, the surgical intervention result was recognized as positive both according to the patient assessment and medical researcher assessment. There was a significant improvement in indicators reflecting the central compartment condition (apical prolapse), as well as the anterior and posterior vaginal walls. All female patients showed an improvement in their life quality. The patients also showed positive tendency according to pelvic ultrasound after surgery. No pelvic mesh complications were reported. The parameters of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) system assessment did not differ significantly in female patients from both groups 1, 6, 12 and 24 months of follow-up after surgery.
Conclusion: based on the obtained follow-up data, correction of central, posterior and partially anterior prolapse was achieved in patients after combined transverse and longitudinal fixation of synthetic implants. Pectopexy is safe and comparable to sacrocolpopexy, which is currently considered the most common surgery, gives a positive effect in correcting pelvic organ prolapse and improves the life quality of female patients.
Keywords: genital prolapse, combined laparoscopic surgery, mesh implants, surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse, laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy, laparoscopic pectopexy, life quality.
For citation: Pyatkina A.N., Bryunin D.V., Chushkov Yu.V. Laparoscopic correction methods of pelvic organ prolapse. Russian Journal of Woman and Child Health. 2024;7(1):18–25 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.32364/2618-8430-2024-7-1-3.
About the authors:
Alina N. Pyatkina — postgraduate student of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology No. 1, N.V. Sklifosovskiy Institute of Clinical Medicine, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University); 8, build. 2, Trubetskaya str., Moscow, 119991, Russian Federation; ORCID iD 0000-0002-4260-9661.
Dmitry V. Bryunin — Dr. Sc. (Med.), Professor of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology No. 1, N.V. Sklifosovskiy Institute of Clinical Medicine, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University); 8, build. 2, Trubetskaya str., Moscow, 119991, Russian Federation; ORCID iD 0000-0002-5969-4217.
Yuri V. Chushkov — C. Sc. (Med.), Associate Professor of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology No. 1, N.V. Sklifosovskiy Institute of Clinical Medicine, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University); 8, build. 2, Trubetskaya str., Moscow, 119991, Russian Federation; ORCID iD 0000-0001-8125-1829. Contact information: Alina N. Pyatkina, e-mail: patkinaalina@gmail.com.
Financial Disclosure: no authors have a financial or property interest in any material or method mentioned.
There is no conflict of interest.
Received 03.07.2023.
Revised 24.07.2023.
Accepted 14.08.2023.
2. Селихова М.С., Ершов Г.В., Ершов А.Г. Пролапс тазовых органов — «скрытая эпидемия XXI века». Успехи геронтологии. 2021;34(3):431–437. DOI: 10.34922/AE.2021.34.3.013. [Selikhova M.S., Yershov G.V., Yershov A.G. Pelvic organ prolapse is the "hidden epidemic of the 21st century.” Uspekhi gerontologii. 2021;34(3):431–437 (in Russ.)]. DOI: 10.34922/AE.2021.34.3.013.
3. Weintraub A.Y., Glinter H., Marcus-Braun N. Narrative review of the epidemiology, diagnosis and pathophysiology of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Braz J Urol. 2020;46(1):5–14. DOI: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2018.0581.
4. Forner L.B., Beckman E.M., Smith M.D. Symptoms of pelvic organ prolapse in women who lift heavy weights for exercise: a cross-sectional survey. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31(8):1551–1558. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-019-04163-w.
5. Gyhagen M., Bullarbo M., Nielsen T.F., Milsom I. Prevalence and risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse 20 years after childbirth: a national cohort study in singleton primiparae after vaginal or caesarean delivery. BJOG. 2013;120(2):152–160. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.12020.
6. Collins S., Lewicky-Gaupp C. Pelvic Organ Prolapse. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2022;51(1):177–193. DOI: 10.1016/j.gtc.2021.10.011.
7. Metcalfe N.D., Shandley L.M., Young M.R. et al. Pelvic organ prolapse recurrence after apical prolapse repair: does obesity matter? Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33(2):275–284. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-021-04806-x.
8. De Tayrac R., Sentilhes L. Complications of pelvic organ prolapse surgery and methods of prevention. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(11):1859–1872. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-013-2177-9.
9. Паршиков В.В., Миронов А.А., Аникина Е.А. и др. Протезирующая пластика брюшной стенки с применением легких и ультралегких синтетических и титансодержащих материалов в условиях высокой бактериальной контаминации (экспериментальное исследование). Современные технологии в медицине. 2015;4:64–71. DOI: 10.17691/stm2015.7.4.08. [Parshikov V.V., Mironov A.A., Anikina Ye.A. et al. Prosthetic surgery of the abdominal wall using light and ultra-light synthetic and titanium-containing materials under conditions of high bacterial contamination (experimental study). Sovremennyye tekhnologii v meditsine. 2015;4:64–71 (in Russ.)]. DOI: 10.17691/stm2015.7.4.08.
10. Перинеология. Под ред. Радзинского В.Е. М.: РУДН; 2010. [Perineology. Radzinsky V.E. M.: RUDN; 2010 (in Russ.)].
11. Краснопольская И.В., Попов А.А., Тюрина С.С. и др. Сравнительный анализ применения трансвагинальной сакроспинальной фиксации и лапароскопической сакрокольпопексии в лечении пациенток с генитальным пролапсом. Российский вестник акушера-гинеколога. 2014;14(5):66–70. [Krasnopol'skaya I.V., Popov A.A., Tyurina S.S. et al. Comparative analysis of the use of transvaginal sacrospinal fixation and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of patients with genital prolapse. Russian bulletin of obstetrician-gynecologist. 2014;14(5):66–70 (in Russ.)].
12. Veit-Rubin N., Dubuisson J.B., Gayet-Ageron A. et al. Patient satisfaction after laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh for pelvic organ prolapse: outcome report of a continuous series of 417 patients. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28(11):1685–1693. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-017-3327-2.
13. Dubuisson J.B., Dubuisson J., Puigventos J. Laparoscopic Anatomy of the Pelvic Floor. Springer; 2020. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-35498-5.
14. Moroni R.M., Juliato C., Cosson M., Giraudet G. Does sacrocolpopexy present heterogeneity in its surgical technique? A systematic review. Neurourol Urodyn. 2018;37(8):2335–2345. DOI: 10.1002/nau.23764.
15. Giraudet G., Protat A., Cosson M. The anatomy of the sacral promontory: How to avoid complications of the sacrocolpopexy procedure. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218(4):457.e1–457.e3. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.12.236.
16. Васин Р.В., Филимонов В.Б., Васина И.В. Генитальный пролапс: современные аспекты оперативного лечения (обзор литературы). Экспериментальная и клиническая урология. 2017;1:104–115. [Vasin R.V., Filimonov V.B., Vasina I.V. Genital prolapse: contemporary aspects of surgical treatment (literature review). Eksperimental'naya i klinicheskaya urologiya. 2017;1:104–115 (in Russ.)].
17. Sung V.W., Rardin C.R., Raker C.A. et al. Porcine subintestinal submucosal graft augmentation for rectocele repair: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;119(1):125–133. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31823d407e.
18. Коршунов М.Ю. Пролапс тазовых органов у женщин: персонализированный подход к диагностике, хирургической коррекции и оценке результатов лечения: aвтореф. дис. … д-ра мед. наук. СПб.; 2017. [Korshunov M.Y. Pelvic organ prolapse in women: a personalized approach to diagnosis, surgical correction and evaluation of treatment results: thesis. SPb.; 2017 (in Russ.)].
19. Gyhagen M., Bullarbo M., Nielsen T.F. et al. Prevalence and risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse 20 years after childbirth: a national cohort studyin singleton primiparae after vaginal or caesarean delivery. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;120:152–160. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.12020.
20. Dietz H.P. Pelvic floor ultrasound in prolapse: what's in it for the surgeon? Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22(10):1221–1232. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-011-1459-3.
21. Fleischer A.C., Harvey S.M., Kurita S.C. Two-/three-dimensional transperineal sonography of complicated tape and mesh implants. Ultrasound Q. 2012;28(4):243–249. DOI: 10.1097/RUQ.0b013e3182749585.
22. Гинекология: национальное руководство. Под ред. Савельевой Г.В., Сухих Г.Т., Серова В.Н. и др. М.: ГЭОТАР-Медиа; 2017. [Gynecology: national guidelines. Eds Savel'yev G.V., Sukhikh G.T., Serov V.N. et al. M.: GEOTAR-Media; 2017 (in Russ.)].
23. Shek K.L., Dietz H.P. Pelvic floor ultrasonography: an update. Minerva Ginecol. 2013;65(1):1–20.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons «Attribution» 4.0 License.
