Subjective and Objective Outcomes of Robotic and Vaginal High Uterosacral Ligament Suspension

Abstract

These short-term outcomes are promising and show a high success rate for the uterosacral ligament suspension at the time of a hysterectomy regardless of whether it was performed vaginally or robotically.

Short‐term results of changes in existing and de novo lower urinary tract symptoms after robot‐assisted laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrocolpopexy

“…In their study, Davila et al reported that none of the 5 patients treated with robotic‐assisted laparoscopic single‐site uterosacral ligament suspension developed de novo SUI after the procedure. Similarly, a retrospective study by Vallabh‐Patel et al found no new cases of onset of stress or urge urinary incontinence in the RALUSLS group, whereas 1 patient had occult SUI on urodynamic testing.…”

Mid-term efficacy of surgical treatments for post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: a retrospective study

“…The 3 criteria proposed by Vallabh-Patel et al (9) were adopted for RPS: (I) the distance between the most distal end of the prolapsed anterior or posterior vaginal wall and the hymen was ≤0 cm, and descent of vaginal vault was ≤1/2 the full length of the vagina; (II) it was determined that the related symptoms of POP had disappeared according to the third question in Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-Short Form 20 (PFDI-20) ("Do you often see or feel a vaginal mass protruding? "); (III) no surgery or pessary treatment was performed for the prolapse.…”

Long-term efficacy of transvaginal high uterosacral ligament suspension for middle-compartment defect-based pelvic organ prolapse

“…We adopted the criteria for successful surgery proposed by Vallabh-Patel et al (8), including (I) ≤0 cm prolapse for the leading edge and prolapse ≤1/2 of the total vaginal length from the vaginal vault; (II) absence of related POP symptoms as reported on the third question of our survey ("Do you usually have a bulge or something falling from your vaginal area that you can see or feel? "), of the pelvic floor distress inventory-short form 20 (PFDI-20); and (III) neither prolapse re-operation nor pessary use.…”

“…Of the 84 POP patients, the median age was 59 (range, 38-87) years; the median body mass index (BMI) was 23.4 (17.0-34.8) kg/m 2 ; and the median numbers for pregnancies and births were 3 [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] and 2 [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8], respectively. None of the patients had a history of hormone replacement therapy, and there were 59 cases (70%, 59/84) of menopause.…”