Laparoscopic Hysteropexy: 10 Years' Experience
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
IntUrogynecolJ DOI 10.1007/s00192-016-3257-4 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Laparoscopic hysteropexy: 10 years’ experience Helen Jefferis1 & Natalia Price1 & Simon Jackson1 Received: 27 October 2016 /Accepted: 27 December 2016 # The International Urogynecological Association 2017 Abstract gery as an alternative to hysterectomy for the management of Introduction and hypothesis Uterine prolapse is common and uterine prolapse. has traditionally been treated by vaginal hysterectomy. Increasingly, women are seeking uterine-preserving alterna- Keywords Laparoscopic hysteropexy . Pelvic organ tives. Laparoscopic hysteropexy offers resuspension of the prolapse . Uterine preservation uterus using polypropylene mesh. We report on 10 years’ ex- perience with this technique. Methods All hysteropexy procedures in our unit since 2006 Introduction were reviewed. Primary outcome was safety of hysteropexy, as assessed by intraoperative and major postoperative compli- Pelvic organ prolapse is common and can have a significantly cations. Secondary outcomes were measures of feasibility, in- adverse impact on quality of life. More than 1 in 10 parous cluding operating time, length of stay, conversion to alterna- women will undergo surgery for pelvic floor disorders [1], and tive procedures, change in point C, patient satisfaction, and the risk of recurrence and repeat surgery is high. The most repeat apical prolapse surgery. commonly performed procedure for apical prolapse remains Results Data were available for 507 women. Complications hysterectomy with or without additional vault support, but this were rare (1.8%) with no evidence of any mesh exposure. operation is associated with significant rates of subsequent Mean operating time was 62.5 min and median length of stay recurrence of apical prolapse [2, 3]. As long ago as 1934, 2 nights. In 17 patients (3.4%), hysteropexy was abandoned. Victor Bonney highlighted the passive role of the uterus in There was a mean change in point C of 7.9 cm and 93.8% of prolapse [4], with the true culprit being the deficiency and patients felt that their prolapse was Bvery much^ or Bmuch^ weakness of pelvic floor ligamentous support. Hysterectomy better. Of these women, 2.8% have had repeat apical surgery. alone does not correct the underlying pathophysiology and Conclusions To our knowledge, this is the largest series to additional apical suspension is often necessary. Uterine pres- date, describing 10 years’ experience with laparoscopic ervation techniques have increased in popularity of late, in hysteropexy. The surgical technique appears to be safe, with part because of the desire of patients to retain their uterus, low complication rates, which supports the choice of appro- and in part because of the quest for improved long-term out- priately selected women to opt for uterine preservation sur- comes. A number of techniques have been described, includ- ing vaginal, abdominal, and laparoscopic approaches, with varying outcomes [5]. Overall sample sizes are small, which means it is difficult to prove the safety and feasibility of these procedures. * Helen Jefferis The laparoscopic hysteropexy technique used in Oxford [email protected] has been previously described [6], and we have published outcomes, but the population size has been small [7, 8]. We 1 Department of Urogynaecology, John Radcliffe Hospital, now report data from a larger cohort of patients over a 10-year Oxford OX3 9DU, UK period. Int Urogynecol J Materials and methods Follow-up Patient selection Patients are seen at a post-operative follow-up visit, usually carried out 2–3 months post-surgery. Patients are asked to As a tertiary referral centre in Oxford, we have offered lapa- subjectively assess response to surgery using the Patient roscopic hysteropexy as an alternative to hysterectomy since Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I). This is a seven- 2006. The choice of surgery is determined by the patient, after scale response comparing pre- and post-operative states, 1 discussion about both hysterectomy and uterine conservation. being Bvery much better^ and 7 being Bvery much worse^. In some cases, we would recommend hysterectomy, for ex- They are examined and a POP-Q assessment performed as an ample, in abnormal uterine bleeding, cervical cytology or objective assessment tool. medical conditions precluding general anaesthesia or steep Trendelenburg position. In a few cases, childbearing is incom- plete and hysterectomy is contraindicated. However, most of Data collection our patients can have the choice of either hysterectomy or laparoscopic hysteropexy. This was a retrospective cohort study and as such ethics ap- proval was not required; however, approval was obtained Surgical technique from the regional audit committee. Cases were identified using our theatre records (Theatre Information Management The surgical technique used for the BOxford hysteropexy^ has Systems or TIMS). Data were then gathered from TIMS, the previously been described [6]. At laparoscopy, the peritoneum British Society of Urogynaecology (BSUG) database, and pa- over the sacral promontory is incised to access a safe window tient records. Data are entered prospectively at the time of of periosteum for fixation. A peritoneal-relaxing incision is surgery onto TIMS and the BSUG database. Our unit started then made medial to the right ureter and the utero-vesical fold performing laparoscopic hysteropexy in 2006, which marked opened to reflect the bladder. A type 1 polypropylene mesh the beginning of the cohort. All women undergoing laparo- (Prolene™ mesh; Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA) is cut in a scopic hysteropexy were included from this point until April bifurcated shape, the arms are brought through avascular win- 2016, thus yielding 10 years of data. This cohort includes dows created in the broad ligament and fixed anteriorly to the patients previously reported on in short-term and medium- cervix with non-absorbable sutures (Ethibond Excel™; term follow-up studies and in the randomised controlled trial Ethicon). The peritoneum is closed over the mesh and secured comparing vaginal hysterectomy with laparoscopic with absorbable sutures (Monocryl™; Ethicon), then attached hysteropexy [7, 8, 10]. to the sacral promontory under moderate tension using a heli- Information gathered included demographic data, previous cal fastener (Protack™; United States Surgical, Tyco urogynaecological surgery, concomitant vaginal prolapse sur- Healthcare, Norwalk, CT, USA). gery, additional procedures, intra-operative and major post- The technique has been modified over the 10-year period; in operative complications, length of procedure, seniority of the particular, the mesh was initially not fully peritonised, a previ- surgeon, and length of hospital stay. The position of point C ous publication having shown that this was not necessary [9]. was noted pre- and post-operatively. Patient satisfaction was However, subsequent laparoscopies in 3 of our patients re- assessed using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement vealed extensive bowel adhesions to the exposed mesh; hence, (PGI-I). Data were also collected from the theatre records as to our practice changed to always covering the mesh with perito- whether repeat prolapse surgery had been performed. neum. Initially, we used a ProLite mesh (ProLite™; Atrium Medical Corporation, Hudson, NH, USA), cutting the Btail^, extending from the cervix to the sacrum, to a width of 2–3cm; Analysis however, we have had a few apical prolapse recurrences and in all cases the mesh had stretched; thus, a wider 5-cm mesh tail The primary outcome was the safety of the procedure, as was utilised from 2011 onwards (Prolene™ mesh; Ethicon). assessed by the frequency of intra-operative or major post- operative complications. Secondary outcomes included oper- Assessment of prolapse ating time, length of stay and inability to complete hysteropexy requiring the procedure to be abandoned or con- Patients are examined by a senior medical member of the verted to alternative techniques. Further secondary outcomes Urogynaecology team in the left lateral lithotomy position were changed in point C, subjective assessment of surgical with Valsalva straining. The Pelvic Organ Prolapse outcome using the Patient Global Impression of Quantification (POP-Q) scale was used to determine cervical Improvement (PGI-I) scale and need for repeat apical surgery. position (point C) pre- and post-surgery. Descriptive statistics were used for the whole population. IntUrogynecolJ Results performing additional vaginal repairs at the time of laparo- scopic hysteropexy; however, practice has recently become A total of 586 cases were identified on TIMS for the period more conservative. These numbers are demonstrated by year 2006 to April 2016. When cases were looked at in more detail, in Table 2. Three hundred and sixty-four procedures (71.8%) 14 were found to have been incorrectly recorded as laparo- were carried out by one of three consultants, 136 (26.8%) by scopic hysteropexy, whereas they had actually had laparo- the resident urogynaecology subspecialty trainee, and 7 scopic sacrocolpopexy and were therefore excluded from (1.4%) by a visiting fellow. The mean duration of surgery analysis. Twelve cases were duplicates, having had their re- (including time for additional procedures) was 62.5 min cords entered twice onto the BSUG database in error, and (range 27–125, standard deviation 25.2, interquartile range were excluded. In 53 cases, the main medical notes were un- 37). Consultants,