Medium-term outcomes of laparoscopic sacropexy on symptoms and quality of life. Predictive factors for postoperative dissatisfaction

Quality of Life Following Pelvic Organ Prolapse Treatments in Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Quality of life (QoL) improvement is one of the main outcomes in the management of pelvic organ prolapse as a chronic illness in women. This systematic review aimed to investigate the impact of surgical or pessary treatment for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) on quality of life. Methods: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was applied. Electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, were searched for original articles that evaluated the QoL before and after surgical interventions or pessary in pelvic organ prolapse from 1 January 2012 until 30 June 2022 with a combination of proper keywords. Included studies were categorized based on interventions, and they were tabulated to summarize the results. Results: Overall, 587 citations were retrieved. Of these, 76 articles were found eligible for final review. Overall, three categories of intervention were identified: vaginal surgeries (47 studies), abdominal surgeries (18 studies), and pessary intervention (11 studies). Almost all interventions were associated with improved quality of life. The results of the meta-analysis showed a significant association between the employment of surgical approach techniques (including vaginal and abdominal surgeries) and the quality of life (Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI) (MD: −48.08, 95% CI: −62.34 to −33.77, p-value < 0.01), Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ) (MD: −33.41, 95% CI: −43.48 to −23.34, p < 0.01)) and sexual activity of patients with pelvic organ prolapse (Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ) (MD: 4.84, 95% CI: 1.75 to 7.92, p < 0.01)). Furthermore, narrative synthesis for studies investigating the effect of the pessary approach showed a positive association between the use of this instrument and improvement in the quality of life and sexual activity. Conclusions: The results of our study revealed a significant improvement in the women’s quality of life following abdominal and vaginal reconstructive surgery. The use of pessary was also associated with increased patient quality of life.

Medium-term outcomes 2 years after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a retrospective cohort study in Japan

This study was performed to investigate medium-term outcomes and reoperation rates after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC). We examined 119 patients undergoing LSC for symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The primary outcomes were subjective failure and anatomical failure at 2 years; a score ≥ 2 on question 3 of the PFDI-20 was considered to indicate subjective failure. POP-Q stage 2 or higher in any compartment was considered to indicate anatomical failure. Secondary outcomes were reoperations for POP recurrence, mesh-related complications, and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The rates of subjective failure and anatomical failure were 4.2% (n = 5) and 9.2% (n = 11), respectively. Reoperations were needed in 13.4% (n = 16) of patients, including SUI with tape procedure in 7.5% (n = 9), POP recurrence in 4.2% (n = 5), and mesh-related complications in 1.6% (n = 2). The subjective failure rate at 2 years after LSC was acceptably low.Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) has clinical efficacy equivalent to open sacrocolpopexy, and there is evidence that LSC involves less blood loss and shorter length of hospital stay. However, there is still insufficient evidence to assess medium-term outcomes after LSC in Japan.What the results of this study revealed? The findings of this study showed excellent medium-term rates of subjective failure (4.2%) and anatomical failure (8.4%) after LSC. We demonstrated that patients with persistent postoperative vaginal bulge (subjective failure) also had no improvement in postoperative urinary and colorectal symptoms. Our cohort had low rates of reoperation (13.4%) after LSC. The most common reoperations were for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) (7.5%), followed by pelvic organ prolapse (POP) recurrence (4.2%) and mesh-related complications (1.6%).What are the implications of these findings in clinical practice and/or further research? This study showed that LSC is a safe and effective treatment for POP. Comparative evaluation of anatomical outcomes and the patient's condition is required to understand the extent to which LSC positively impacts a woman's pelvic floor-related quality of life.