Laparoscopic colposuspension: a systematic review

Moehrer, Birgit; Carey, Marcus; Wilson, Don

doi:10.1046/j.1471-0528.2003.02050.x

Cited by 50 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 15 publications

(48 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study has not been able to show any difference in cure rate between performing an OC using sutures compared to LCS. The latter result is in line with the conclusion in the Cochrane report (5). Our findings indicate that the type of attachment between the Coopers ligaments and the paravaginal facia rather than the surgical approach is important for the outcome.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A three‐armed randomized trial comparing open Burch colposuspension using sutures with laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures and laparoscopic colposuspension using mesh and staples in women with stress urinary incontinence

Ankardal

Milsom

Stjerndahl

et al. 2005

Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Four eligible randomized trials comparing open and laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures (LCS), in women with urinary stress incontinence were identified (1–4) in the Cochrane review of laparoscopic colposuspension (5). According to this report, no differences were found between open and laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A three‐armed randomized trial comparing open Burch colposuspension using sutures with laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures and laparoscopic colposuspension using mesh and staples in women with stress urinary incontinence

Ankardal

Milsom

Stjerndahl

et al. 2005

Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Burch colposuspension appears to be an effective and durable anti‐incontinent procedure 16 . LBC has been performed for over a decade with a relatively small number of reported prospective randomised trials 6,17 . Most of the trials comparing surgical outcomes have been complicated by different surgical techniques for the open and laparoscopic approaches, such as different number or type of sutures 6,17 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The open Burch colposuspension (OBC) has often been referred to as the ‘gold standard’ surgical procedure for stress incontinence, with a cure rate of 82% at 5 years 1,2 . The laparoscopic Burch colposuspension (LBC), first described in the early 1990s, has the proposed advantages of no laparotomy incision, less postoperative pain, shorter time in hospital, and a quicker return to normal activities 3–6 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laparoscopic versus open Burch colposuspension: a randomised controlled trial

Carey¹,

Goh²,

Rosamilia

et al. 2006

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare perioperative characteristics, short-term, and long-term outcomes for laparoscopic Burch colposuspension (LBC) and open Burch colposuspension (OBC) for the treatment of urinary stress incontinence.Design Randomised surgical trial with single blinding.Setting Three tertiary level teaching hospitals involving seven surgeons of varying skill levels.Population Two hundred women with urodynamic stress incontinence (USI).Methods The two groups were treated in identical fashion, except for the laparoscopic or open approach to surgery. Attempts were made to blind the subjects and the observers obtaining outcome data to treatment group. Analyses were adjusted for surgeon experience.Main outcome measures Absence of USI 6 months following surgery, postoperative pain, time spent in hospital, and time to return to activities of normal daily living.Results There were no significant differences in objective and subjective measures of cure and in patient satisfaction at 6 months, 24 months, or 3-5 years of follow up between laparoscopic and open colposuspension groups. Laparoscopic colposuspension took longer time to perform (87 versus 42 minutes, P < 0.0001) but was associated with less blood loss (P = 0.03), less pain (P = 0.02), and quicker return to normal activities (P = 0.01).Conclusion LBC has significant advantages over traditional OBC, without any apparent compromise in short-term and long-term outcomes.

show abstract

“…In a Cochrane review of laparoscopic colposuspension, 12 almost all randomised studies analysed used a suturing technique to suspend the vagina. Four trials of good quality comparing open and laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures were found 6–8,13 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A randomised trial comparing open Burch colposuspension using sutures with laparoscopic colposuspension using mesh and staples in women with stress urinary incontinence

Ankardal

Ekerydh

Crafoord

et al. 2004

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare open Burch colposuspension using sutures with laparoscopic colposuspension using mesh and staples in women with stress urinary incontinence. Design Multicentre, prospective randomised trial.Setting Departments of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Borås County Hospital and Ö rebro University Hospital, Sweden. Population Women with genuine stress urinary incontinence or mixed incontinence with a predominantly stress component were included, and were randomised to either open colposuspension (n ¼ 120) or laparoscopic colposuspension (n ¼ 120). Methods Women were randomised to open colposuspension with sutures or laparoscopic colposuspension with polypropylene mesh and staples. Anaesthesia/operation time, blood loss, complications and other related surgical parameters were compared. Main outcome measures Objective and subjective cure rates from 48-hour frequency -volume chart, a 48-hour pad test and a subjective assessment of the woman's incontinence and quality of life performed one year after surgery. Results Objective and subjective cure rates were higher after open compared with laparoscopic colposuspension (P < 0.001). Quality of life was improved following surgery in both groups (P < 0.0001) and the improvement was significantly greater in the open colposuspension group (P < 0.05) with regard to physical activity. Performing an open colposuspension was less time consuming (P < 0.0001), resulted in more blood loss (P < 0.0001), longer catheterisation time (P < 0.01), greater risk of urinary retention (P < 0.01) and a longer hospital stay (P < 0.0001) compared with performing a laparoscopic colposuspension. The rate of serious complications was low in both groups. Conclusion Open colposuspension had a higher objective and subjective cure rate one year after surgery but with a greater blood loss, greater risk of urinary retention and a longer hospital stay than laparoscopic colposuspension.

show abstract

Laparoscopic colposuspension: a systematic review

Cited by 50 publications

References 15 publications

A three‐armed randomized trial comparing open Burch colposuspension using sutures with laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures and laparoscopic colposuspension using mesh and staples in women with stress urinary incontinence

A three‐armed randomized trial comparing open Burch colposuspension using sutures with laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures and laparoscopic colposuspension using mesh and staples in women with stress urinary incontinence

Laparoscopic versus open Burch colposuspension: a randomised controlled trial

A randomised trial comparing open Burch colposuspension using sutures with laparoscopic colposuspension using mesh and staples in women with stress urinary incontinence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About