Commentary on: Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy compared with open abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vault prolapse repair: a randomised controlled trial

Commentary on: Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy compared with open abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vault... Int Urogynecol J (2018) 29:453 DOI 10.1007/s00192-017-3490-5 COMMENTARY Commentary on: Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy compared with open abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vault prolapse repair: a randomised controlled trial Alexandra Mowat Received: 12 September 2017 /Accepted: 12 September 2017 /Published online: 13 October 2017 The International Urogynecological Association 2017 This multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) compared significantly different between the two groups. In conclu- laparoscopic and open sacrocolpopexy in 74 women with sion, this study adds to the evidence that subjective and symptomatic vault prolapse. Most previous studies have objective outcomes are similar between open and laparo- found that the laparoscopic and open approaches have similar scopic sacrocolpopexy, with the laparoscopic approach having some preoperative advantages. anatomical outcomes but that the laparoscopic approach has the advantages of less blood loss and shorter hospital stay [1–4]. However, one recently published RCT found that the open approach has an anatomical advantage in the anterior References compartment at 3 years [5]. The primary outcome in the pres- ent study was disease-specific quality of life measured using 1. Coolen AWM, van Oudheusden AMJ, Mol BWJ, van Eijndhoven the Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI) at 12 months. Secondary HWF, Roovers JWR, Bongers MY. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy outcomes included anatomical outcomes at 12 months. There compared with open abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vault prolapse repair: a randomised controlled trial. Int Urogynecol J. 2017. https:// was adequate description of randomization and concealment, 10.1007/s00192-017-3296-5. but there was a 14% attrition rate and participant or assessor 2. Freeman RM, Pantazis K, Thomson A, Frappell J, Bombieri L, blinding was not possible due to the nature of the procedures Moran P, et al. A randomised controlled trial of abdominal versus being compared. laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: LAS study. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;24(3): At 12 months both groups showed significant improve- 377–84. ment in their UDI scores compared with before surgery, but 3. Paraiso MF, Walters MD, Rackley RR, Melek S, Hugney C. the changes were not significantly different between the two Laparoscopic and abdominal sacral colpopexies: a comparative co- groups. Around 70% of women in both groups rated their hort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192(5):1752–8. outcome according to the Patient Global Impression of 4. Klauschie JL, Suozzi BA, O’Brien MM, McBride AWA. comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal sacral colpopexy: objective outcome Improvement (PGI-I) as either Bmuch better^ or Bvery much and perioperative differences. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor better^. There was significantly less blood loss (86 ml vs. Dysfunct. 2009;20(3):273–9. 200 ml, p < 0.0001) and shorter hospital stay (2 day vs. 4 days, 5. Costantini E, Mearini L, Lazzeri M, Bini V, Nunzi E, di Biase M, p < 0.01) in the laparoscopic group. POP-Q scores, compli- et al. Laparoscopic versus abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a randomized, cations, operating times and reoperation rates were not controlled trial. J Urol. 2016;196(1):159–65. * Alexandra Mowat zanhmowat@gmail.com Greenslopes Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Brisbane, Australia http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Urogynecology Journal Springer Journals

Commentary on: Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy compared with open abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vault prolapse repair: a randomised controlled trial

Free
1 page

Loading next page...
1 Page
 
/lp/springer_journal/commentary-on-laparoscopic-sacrocolpopexy-compared-with-open-abdominal-220Erk8vnL
Publisher
Springer London
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 by The International Urogynecological Association
Subject
Medicine & Public Health; Gynecology; Urology
ISSN
0937-3462
eISSN
1433-3023
D.O.I.
10.1007/s00192-017-3490-5
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Int Urogynecol J (2018) 29:453 DOI 10.1007/s00192-017-3490-5 COMMENTARY Commentary on: Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy compared with open abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vault prolapse repair: a randomised controlled trial Alexandra Mowat Received: 12 September 2017 /Accepted: 12 September 2017 /Published online: 13 October 2017 The International Urogynecological Association 2017 This multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) compared significantly different between the two groups. In conclu- laparoscopic and open sacrocolpopexy in 74 women with sion, this study adds to the evidence that subjective and symptomatic vault prolapse. Most previous studies have objective outcomes are similar between open and laparo- found that the laparoscopic and open approaches have similar scopic sacrocolpopexy, with the laparoscopic approach having some preoperative advantages. anatomical outcomes but that the laparoscopic approach has the advantages of less blood loss and shorter hospital stay [1–4]. However, one recently published RCT found that the open approach has an anatomical advantage in the anterior References compartment at 3 years [5]. The primary outcome in the pres- ent study was disease-specific quality of life measured using 1. Coolen AWM, van Oudheusden AMJ, Mol BWJ, van Eijndhoven the Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI) at 12 months. Secondary HWF, Roovers JWR, Bongers MY. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy outcomes included anatomical outcomes at 12 months. There compared with open abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vault prolapse repair: a randomised controlled trial. Int Urogynecol J. 2017. https:// was adequate description of randomization and concealment, 10.1007/s00192-017-3296-5. but there was a 14% attrition rate and participant or assessor 2. Freeman RM, Pantazis K, Thomson A, Frappell J, Bombieri L, blinding was not possible due to the nature of the procedures Moran P, et al. A randomised controlled trial of abdominal versus being compared. laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: LAS study. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;24(3): At 12 months both groups showed significant improve- 377–84. ment in their UDI scores compared with before surgery, but 3. Paraiso MF, Walters MD, Rackley RR, Melek S, Hugney C. the changes were not significantly different between the two Laparoscopic and abdominal sacral colpopexies: a comparative co- groups. Around 70% of women in both groups rated their hort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192(5):1752–8. outcome according to the Patient Global Impression of 4. Klauschie JL, Suozzi BA, O’Brien MM, McBride AWA. comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal sacral colpopexy: objective outcome Improvement (PGI-I) as either Bmuch better^ or Bvery much and perioperative differences. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor better^. There was significantly less blood loss (86 ml vs. Dysfunct. 2009;20(3):273–9. 200 ml, p < 0.0001) and shorter hospital stay (2 day vs. 4 days, 5. Costantini E, Mearini L, Lazzeri M, Bini V, Nunzi E, di Biase M, p < 0.01) in the laparoscopic group. POP-Q scores, compli- et al. Laparoscopic versus abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a randomized, cations, operating times and reoperation rates were not controlled trial. J Urol. 2016;196(1):159–65. * Alexandra Mowat zanhmowat@gmail.com Greenslopes Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Brisbane, Australia

Journal

International Urogynecology JournalSpringer Journals

Published: Oct 13, 2017

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off