Long-Term Outcomes Following Vaginal versus Laparoscopic Uterosacral Ligament Suspension.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Sarah Sears, Megan Abrams, Kasey Palm, Susan Wherley, Robert Pollard, Jeffrey Mangel, David Sheyn
{"title":"Long-Term Outcomes Following Vaginal versus Laparoscopic Uterosacral Ligament Suspension.","authors":"Sarah Sears, Megan Abrams, Kasey Palm, Susan Wherley, Robert Pollard, Jeffrey Mangel, David Sheyn","doi":"10.1007/s00192-025-06132-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction and hypothesis: </strong>Long-term outcomes following vaginal (V-USLS) versus laparoscopic (L-USLS) uterosacral ligament suspension have not been reported in the literature. Our objective was to compare long-term outcomes following V-USLS versus L-USLS following hysterectomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was an ambispective cohort study at a single academic institution comparing patients who underwent a V-USLS following a vaginal hysterectomy or L-USLS following a laparoscopic hysterectomy from 2013 to 2018. The primary outcome was composite prolapse recurrence rate, combining subjective prolapse symptoms and objective failure, including prolapse beyond the hymen on pelvic organ prolapse quantification exam or retreatment. A power calculation determined 68 patients in each group would be required to detect a difference of 15% in recurrence rates. Statistical analysis was performed using Student' t-test, Wilcoxon rank sum test, chi-square test, or Fishers exact test, and multivariable logistic regression where appropriate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-six patients in each group presented for a study visit. Preoperative POP-Q measurements were similar between groups. Surgical complication rates were low and similar between groups. Mean follow-up time was 6.8 years, similar between groups. V-USLS had higher rates of recurrent prolapse beyond the hymen on POP-Q (33.2% vs 11.1%, p = 0.016), retreatment (25.0% vs 2.8%, p = 0.006), and composite failure (47.2% vs 22.2%, p = 0.019). Subjective prolapse symptoms were similar between groups. V-USLS was associated with a higher risk of prolapse recurrence (aOR 1.73 (95%CI 1.13-5.78). Anterior prolapse (Aa) was associated with higher recurrence risk, with aOR 2.04 (95%CI 1.15-3.62) per every 1 cm, up to 3 cm beyond the hymen.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>On the basis of these results, L-USLS appears to have a decreased association with recurrence compared to V-USLS. Conclusions are limited by a small sample size.</p>","PeriodicalId":14355,"journal":{"name":"International Urogynecology Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urogynecology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-025-06132-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis: Long-term outcomes following vaginal (V-USLS) versus laparoscopic (L-USLS) uterosacral ligament suspension have not been reported in the literature. Our objective was to compare long-term outcomes following V-USLS versus L-USLS following hysterectomy.

Methods: This was an ambispective cohort study at a single academic institution comparing patients who underwent a V-USLS following a vaginal hysterectomy or L-USLS following a laparoscopic hysterectomy from 2013 to 2018. The primary outcome was composite prolapse recurrence rate, combining subjective prolapse symptoms and objective failure, including prolapse beyond the hymen on pelvic organ prolapse quantification exam or retreatment. A power calculation determined 68 patients in each group would be required to detect a difference of 15% in recurrence rates. Statistical analysis was performed using Student' t-test, Wilcoxon rank sum test, chi-square test, or Fishers exact test, and multivariable logistic regression where appropriate.

Results: Thirty-six patients in each group presented for a study visit. Preoperative POP-Q measurements were similar between groups. Surgical complication rates were low and similar between groups. Mean follow-up time was 6.8 years, similar between groups. V-USLS had higher rates of recurrent prolapse beyond the hymen on POP-Q (33.2% vs 11.1%, p = 0.016), retreatment (25.0% vs 2.8%, p = 0.006), and composite failure (47.2% vs 22.2%, p = 0.019). Subjective prolapse symptoms were similar between groups. V-USLS was associated with a higher risk of prolapse recurrence (aOR 1.73 (95%CI 1.13-5.78). Anterior prolapse (Aa) was associated with higher recurrence risk, with aOR 2.04 (95%CI 1.15-3.62) per every 1 cm, up to 3 cm beyond the hymen.

Conclusions: On the basis of these results, L-USLS appears to have a decreased association with recurrence compared to V-USLS. Conclusions are limited by a small sample size.

阴道与腹腔镜子宫骶韧带悬吊术后的远期疗效。
引言和假设:阴道子宫骶骨韧带悬吊术(V-USLS)与腹腔镜子宫骶骨韧带悬吊术(L-USLS)的长期疗效尚未见文献报道。我们的目的是比较子宫切除术后 V-USLS 与 L-USLS 的长期疗效:这是一项在单一学术机构进行的前瞻性队列研究,比较了 2013 年至 2018 年期间在阴道子宫切除术后接受 V-USLS 或在腹腔镜子宫切除术后接受 L-USLS 的患者。主要结果是综合脱垂复发率,即主观脱垂症状和客观失败,包括盆腔器官脱垂定量检查或再治疗时脱垂超过处女膜。经功率计算,每组需要 68 名患者才能检测出复发率 15% 的差异。统计分析采用学生 t 检验、Wilcoxon 秩和检验、秩和检验或 Fishers 精确检验,并酌情采用多变量逻辑回归:每组均有 36 名患者前来就诊。各组患者术前的 POP-Q 测量结果相似。手术并发症发生率较低,组间相似。平均随访时间为 6.8 年,组间相似。V-USLS 在 POP-Q 测量中出现处女膜外复发性脱垂(33.2% vs 11.1%,p = 0.016)、再治疗(25.0% vs 2.8%,p = 0.006)和复合失败(47.2% vs 22.2%,p = 0.019)的比例较高。两组患者的主观脱垂症状相似。V-USLS 与较高的脱垂复发风险相关(aOR 1.73 (95%CI 1.13-5.78))。前脱垂(Aa)与较高的复发风险有关,每1厘米的aOR为2.04(95%CI为1.15-3.62),最高可达处女膜外3厘米:根据上述结果,L-USLS与复发的相关性似乎低于V-USLS。由于样本量较小,结论受到一定限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
22.20%
发文量
406
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Urogynecology Journal is the official journal of the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA).The International Urogynecology Journal has evolved in response to a perceived need amongst the clinicians, scientists, and researchers active in the field of urogynecology and pelvic floor disorders. Gynecologists, urologists, physiotherapists, nurses and basic scientists require regular means of communication within this field of pelvic floor dysfunction to express new ideas and research, and to review clinical practice in the diagnosis and treatment of women with disorders of the pelvic floor. This Journal has adopted the peer review process for all original contributions and will maintain high standards with regard to the research published therein. The clinical approach to urogynecology and pelvic floor disorders will be emphasized with each issue containing clinically relevant material that will be immediately applicable for clinical medicine. This publication covers all aspects of the field in an interdisciplinary fashion
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信