Open AccessSacrospinous vaginal fixation – current status
Author(s) -
PETRI ECKHARD,
ASHOK KIRAN
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
acta obstetricia et gynecologica scandinavica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.401
H-Index - 102
eISSN - 1600-0412
pISSN - 0001-6349
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0412.2011.01084.x
Subject(s) - medicine , surgery , fixation (population genetics) , sacrum , vagina , uterosacral ligament , population , environmental health
There has been a trend towards increased use of synthetic meshes and abdominal procedures with decreased use of sacrospinous fixation (SSF). A Medline search was performed for the MeSH terms ‘sacrospinous ligament’, ‘sacrospinous fixation’, ‘sacrospinous ligament suspension’ and ‘sacrospinous colpopexy’. Published papers from 1996–2010 were selected for analysis. Outcome measures were assessed in terms of efficacy, complications and quality of life after sacrospinous vaginal fixation. Studies on bilateral SSF and fixing uterus to the sacrospinous ligament, use of concomitant anti‐incontinence procedures along with SSF were not included in this review. Sacrospinous vaginal fixation provides good long‐term objective and subjective outcomes and improves quality of life of women with pelvic organ prolapse. Further, complication rates of SSF are comparable to abdominal sacrocolpopexy and are much less than transvaginal mesh procedures and SSF is a cost‐effective procedure. SSF is a time‐tested surgical procedure with a reduction in surgical extent and has a definite place in modern pelvic reconstructive surgery.