Comparing Surgical Outcomes in Laparoscopic Sacral Hysteropexy with or without Retroperitoneal Tunneling.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Pei-Hsuan Lai, Wing Lam Tsui, Dah-Ching Ding
{"title":"Comparing Surgical Outcomes in Laparoscopic Sacral Hysteropexy with or without Retroperitoneal Tunneling.","authors":"Pei-Hsuan Lai, Wing Lam Tsui, Dah-Ching Ding","doi":"10.4293/JSLS.2024.00055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>To evaluate the effectiveness and impact of the retroperitoneal tunneling technique on the surgical time and outcomes of laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy (SHP) for treating pelvic organ prolapse (POP).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This is a retrospective single-center cohort study in a tertiary referral center. Thirty-two consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic SHP for apical prolapse between 2016 and 2023. Laparoscopic SHP with or without right pelvic side wall retroperitoneal tunneling. The primary outcome was surgical time. Secondary outcomes included blood loss, intra-and postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain scores, and improvement in POP quantification (POP-Q) scores. Statistical analyses were performed using t-tests and multiple regression. Statistical significance was set at <i>P</i> < .05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The tunneling group (n = 14) demonstrated significantly shorter surgical times than the nontunneling (n = 18) group (60.79 ± 22.35 minutes vs 98.06 ± 26.28 minutes, <i>P</i> < .001). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding blood loss, intra-and postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, pain scores, or point-C positions during 3 months and 1 year of follow-up. Multiple regression analysis confirmed a significant reduction in surgical time in the tunneling group after adjusting for confounders (-62.36 minutes [95% confidence interval (CI) = -102.7, -21.99, <i>P</i> = .0038]).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The retroperitoneal tunneling technique in laparoscopic SHP significantly reduces the surgical time without increasing the risk of complications. These findings suggest that tunneling is a safe and efficient method that can be routinely adopted for SHP.</p>","PeriodicalId":17679,"journal":{"name":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","volume":"29 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12039164/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2024.00055","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and impact of the retroperitoneal tunneling technique on the surgical time and outcomes of laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy (SHP) for treating pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

Materials and methods: This is a retrospective single-center cohort study in a tertiary referral center. Thirty-two consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic SHP for apical prolapse between 2016 and 2023. Laparoscopic SHP with or without right pelvic side wall retroperitoneal tunneling. The primary outcome was surgical time. Secondary outcomes included blood loss, intra-and postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain scores, and improvement in POP quantification (POP-Q) scores. Statistical analyses were performed using t-tests and multiple regression. Statistical significance was set at P < .05.

Results: The tunneling group (n = 14) demonstrated significantly shorter surgical times than the nontunneling (n = 18) group (60.79 ± 22.35 minutes vs 98.06 ± 26.28 minutes, P < .001). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding blood loss, intra-and postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, pain scores, or point-C positions during 3 months and 1 year of follow-up. Multiple regression analysis confirmed a significant reduction in surgical time in the tunneling group after adjusting for confounders (-62.36 minutes [95% confidence interval (CI) = -102.7, -21.99, P = .0038]).

Conclusion: The retroperitoneal tunneling technique in laparoscopic SHP significantly reduces the surgical time without increasing the risk of complications. These findings suggest that tunneling is a safe and efficient method that can be routinely adopted for SHP.

腹腔镜骶骨子宫切除术有或没有腹膜后隧道的手术效果比较。
背景与目的:探讨腹腔镜骶骨子宫切除术(SHP)治疗盆腔器官脱垂(POP)的效果及对手术时间和预后的影响。材料和方法:这是一项在三级转诊中心进行的回顾性单中心队列研究。2016年至2023年间,连续32例患者接受了腹腔镜下根尖脱垂SHP治疗。有或没有右侧骨盆侧壁腹膜后隧道的腹腔镜SHP。主要观察指标为手术时间。次要结局包括出血量、术后并发症、住院时间、术后疼痛评分和POP量化(POP- q)评分的改善。采用t检验和多元回归进行统计分析。结果:隧道组(n = 14)的手术时间明显短于非隧道组(n = 18)(60.79±22.35 min vs 98.06±26.28 min, P = 0.0038)。结论:腹腔镜下SHP的腹膜后隧道技术可显著缩短手术时间,且不增加并发症的发生风险。这些结果表明,隧道掘进是一种安全有效的方法,可以常规采用。
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
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
69
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgeons publishes original scientific articles on basic science and technical topics in all the fields involved with laparoscopic, robotic, and minimally invasive surgery. CRSLS, MIS Case Reports from SLS is dedicated to the publication of Case Reports in the field of minimally invasive surgery. The journals seek to advance our understandings and practice of minimally invasive, image-guided surgery by providing a forum for all relevant disciplines and by promoting the exchange of information and ideas across specialties.
×
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