Urology
Volume 74, Issue 5 , Pages 1008-1012, November 2009

Single-port Laparoscopic Abdominal Sacral Colpopexy: Initial Experience and Comparative Outcomes

Sections of Laparoscopic and Robotic Urology and Female Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio

Received 21 October 2008; accepted 19 February 2009. published online 31 August 2009.

Objectives

To determine the efficacy and safety of single-port laparoscopic abdominal sacral colpopexy (ASC) for the treatment of female pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was performed to assess perioperative outcomes among women who were treated for symptomatic POP with laparoscopic, robotic, or single-port laparoscopic ASC. All patients underwent preoperative history and physical examination including POP quantification (POP-Q) staging and urodynamics. ASC with or without anti-incontinence surgery was performed via the aforementioned approaches. Demographic and perioperative data were obtained. Patients were followed up postoperatively at 3 and 6 months with POP-Q evaluation. Statistical analysis was performed.

Results

From October 2005 to July 2008, 30 female patients with symptomatic Stage II (6 patients), Stage III (23 patients), or Stage IV (1 patient) POP were treated with laparoscopic (10), robotic (10), or single-port laparoscopic (10) ASC. Mean age of the entire cohort was 61.1 years. Mean body mass index was 26.7 kg/m2. Seventeen patients demonstrated stress urinary incontinence and underwent concomitant sling placement. No intraoperative complications were encountered. No significant difference was noted in the 3 cohorts with respect to operative time, blood loss, mean visual analog pain score at discharge, or duration of hospitalization. At 6 months following surgery, 27 patients underwent follow-up POP-Q, with all patients demonstrating excellent apical support and prolapse reduction.

Conclusions

Single-port laparoscopic ASC offers comparable efficacy and superior cosmesis compared to alternative approaches. Long-term follow-up is needed to confirm durability of repair.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0090-4295(09)00760-2

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2009.02.086

Refers to article:

  • Editorial Comment

    Michael C. Truss
    Urology November 2009 (Vol. 74, Issue 5, Page 1012)

  • Reply

    Jihad H. Kaouk
    Urology November 2009 (Vol. 74, Issue 5, Page 1012)

Urology
Volume 74, Issue 5 , Pages 1008-1012, November 2009