Premium
Infracoccygeal sacropexy or sacrospinous suspension for uterine or vaginal vault prolapse
Author(s) -
Tayrac R.,
Mathé M.L.,
Bader G.,
Deffieux X.,
Fazel A.,
Fernandez H.
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
international journal of gynecology and obstetrics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.895
H-Index - 97
eISSN - 1879-3479
pISSN - 0020-7292
DOI - 10.1016/j.ijgo.2007.07.015
Subject(s) - medicine , uterine prolapse , surgery , hysterectomy , vaginal vault prolapse , hematoma , cure rate , quality of life (healthcare) , nursing
Objective To compare infracoccygeal sacropexy (IS) and sacrospinous suspension (SS) for the treatment of uterine or vault prolapse. Methods A randomized trial of 49 women assigned to either the IS group using IVS tape ( n = 24) or SS group ( n = 25). Concomitant hysterectomy and repairs were performed as appropriate. Evaluations included prolapse staging using the POP‐Q system and validated questionnaires for symptoms (PFDI), quality of life (PFIQ), and sexuality (PISQ‐12). The primary outcome measure was postoperative pain. Results Patients' characteristics were similar in both groups. IS was quicker, easier, and less painful than SS ( P < 0.01). Hemorrhage or hematoma rates were similar. Neither rectal injury nor vaginal erosion occurred. Mean follow‐up was 16.8 months. Prolapse cure rates, symptom scores, and quality of life were similar. Postoperative cystocele occurred in 4.8% of women after IS and 25% after SS ( P > 0.05). Conclusion Infracoccygeal sacropexy is equivalent to sacrospinous suspension, with a decreased rate of postoperative pain and cystocele recurrence.