scholarly journals Comparison of the effectiveness of sacrospinous ligament fixation and sacrocolpopexy: a meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenju Zhang ◽  
Willy Cecilia Cheon ◽  
Li Zhang ◽  
Xiaozhong Wang ◽  
Yuzhen Wei ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Sacrospinous Ligament ◽  
Gastrointestinal Complications ◽  
Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation ◽  
Apical Support ◽  
Abdominal Sacrocolpopexy

Abstract Introduction and hypothesis Sacrocolpopexy and sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) have been used for the restoration of apical support. Studies comparing sacrocolpopexy and SSLF have reported conflicting results. We aim to assess the current evidence regarding efficiency and the complications of sacrocolpopexy compared with SSLF. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library and performed a systematic review meta-analysis to assess the two surgical approaches. Results 5Five randomized controlled trials, 8 retrospective studies, and 2 prospective studies including 4,120 cases were identified. Compared with abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC), SSLF was associated with a lower success rate (88.32% and 91.45%; OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.29–0.95; p = 0.03), higher recurrence (11.58% and 8.32%; OR 1.97; 95% CI 1.04–3.46; p = 0.04), and dyspareunia rate (14.36% and 4.67%; OR 3.10; 95% CI 1.28–7.50; p = 0.01). Patients in this group may benefit from shorter operative time (weighted mean difference −25.08 min; 95% CI −42.29 to −7.88; p = 0.004), lower hemorrhage rate (0.85% and 2.58%; OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.25–0.85; p = 0.009), wound infection rate (3.30% and 5.76%; OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.39–0.77; p = 0.0005), and fewer gastrointestinal complications (1.33% and 6.19%; OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.15–0.76; p = 0.009). Conclusion Both sacrocolpopexy and SSLF offer an efficient alternative to the restoration of apical support. When anatomical durability and sexual function is a priority, ASC may be the preferred option. When considering factors of mesh erosion, operative time, gastrointestinal complications, hemorrhage, and wound infections, SSLF may be the better option.

scholarly journals Should we add unilateral sacrospinous ligament fixation to vaginal hysterectomy in management of stage 3 and stage 4 pelvic organ prolapse?

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 144-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elif Ağaçayak ◽  
Senem Yaman Tunç ◽  
Mehmet Sait İçen ◽  
Serdar Başaranoğlu ◽  
Fatih Mehmet Fındık ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pelvic Organ Prolapse ◽  
Vaginal Hysterectomy ◽  
Pelvic Organ ◽  
Sacrospinous Ligament ◽  
Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation ◽  
Stage 4

Impact of Genital Hiatus Size on Anatomic Outcomes After Mesh-Augmented Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Monique H. Vaughan ◽  
Lauren E. Giugale ◽  
Nazema Y. Siddiqui ◽  
Megan S. Bradley
Keyword(s):  
Sacrospinous Ligament ◽  
Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation ◽  
Genital Hiatus
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document