Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Robotic Abdominal Sacrocolpopexy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Minimally Invasive Urology

  • 1254 Accesses

Abstract

Abdominal sacrocolpopexy with synthetic mesh is a gold-standard technique for the repair of vaginal prolapse; however, the need for general anesthesia, longer operative time, and increased invasiveness compared with vaginal approaches limit its use. The addition of robotic technology is appealing to both the patient and the surgeon as a minimally invasive alternative with acceptable morbidity and complication rates. This chapter briefly reviews the indications and contraindications for repair and focuses on the technical aspects of the procedure. The current outcomes and complications literature are reviewed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(4):805–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Nezhat CH, Nezhat F, Nezhat C. Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 1994;84(5):885–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Paraiso MF, Walters MD, Rackley RR, Melek S, Hugney C. Laparoscopic and abdominal sacral colpopexies: a comparative cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192(5):1752–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Klauschie JL, Suozzi BA, O’Brien MM, McBride AW. A comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal sacral colpopexy: objective outcome and perioperative differences. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2009;20(3):273–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hsiao KC, Latchamsetty K, Govier FE, Kozlowski P, Kobashi KC. Comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. J Endourol. 2007;21(8):926–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Geller EJ, Parnell BA, Dunivan GC. Robotic vs abdominal sacrocolpopexy: 44-month pelvic floor outcomes. Urology. 2012;79(3):532–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89(4):501–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Awad H, Santilli S, Ohr M, et al. The effects of steep trendelenburg positioning on intraocular pressure during robotic radical prostatectomy. Anesth Analg. 2009;109(2):473–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Brizzolara S, Pillai-Allen A. Risk of mesh erosion with sacral colpopexy and concurrent hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102(2):306–10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Cundiff GW, Varner E, Visco AG, et al. Risk factors for mesh/suture erosion following sacral colpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199(6):688 e681–685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wu JM, Wells EC, Hundley AF, Connolly A, Williams KS, Visco AG. Mesh erosion in abdominal sacral colpopexy with and without concomitant hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194(5):1418–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Quiroz LH, Gutman RE, Fagan MJ, Cundiff GW. Partial colpocleisis for the treatment of sacrocolpopexy mesh erosions. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19(2):261–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. South MM, Foster RT, Webster GD, Weidner AC, Amundsen CL. Surgical excision of eroded mesh after prior abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(6):615 e611–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kho RM, Akl MN, Cornella JL, Magtibay PM, Wechter ME, Magrina JF. Incidence and characteristics of patients with vaginal cuff dehiscence after robotic procedures. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(2 Pt 1):231–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Matthews CA, Carroll A, Hill A, Ramakrishnan V, Gill EJ. Prospective evaluation of surgical outcomes of robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy and sacrocervicopexy for the management of apical pelvic support defects. South Med J. 2012;105(5):274–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Woods DL, Hou JY, Riemers L, Gupta D, Kuo DY. Side-docking in robotic-assisted gynaecologic cancer surgery. Int J Med Robot. 2011;7(1):51–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Einarsson JI, Hibner M, Advincula AP. Side docking: an alternative docking method for gynecologic robotic surgery. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2011;4(3–4):123–5.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. McCullough M, Valceus J, Downes K, Hoyte L. The ureter as a landmark for robotic sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2012;18(3):162–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mitchell CR, Gettman M, Chow GK, Elliott D. Robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy: description and video. J Endourol. 2012;26(12):1596–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rosenblum N. Robotic approaches to prolapse surgery. Curr Opin Urol. 2012;22(4):292–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Akl MN, Long JB, Giles DL, et al. Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: technique and learning curve. Surg Endosc. 2009;23(10):2390–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Belsante M, Murray S, Dillon B, Zimmern P. Mid term outcome of robotic mesh sacrocolpopexy. Can J Urol. 2013;20(1):6656–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kramer BA, Whelan CM, Powell TM, Schwartz BF. Robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy as management for pelvic organ prolapse. J Endourol. 2009;23(4):655–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Moreno Sierra J, Ortiz Oshiro E, Fernandez Perez C, et al. Long-term outcomes after robotic sacrocolpopexy in pelvic organ prolapse: prospective analysis. Urol Int. 2011;86(4):414–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Tan-Kim J, Menefee SA, Luber KM, Nager CW, Lukacz ES. Robotic-assisted and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: comparing operative times, costs and outcomes. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2011;17(1):44–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Elliott DS, Krambeck AE, Chow GK. Long-term results of robotic assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of high grade vaginal vault prolapse. J Urol. 2006;176(2):655–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ploumidis A, Spinoit AF, Naeyer GD, et al. Robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: surgical technique and outcomes at a single high-volume institution. Eur Urol. 2014;65:138–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Siddiqui NY, Geller EJ, Visco AG. Symptomatic and anatomic 1-year outcomes after robotic and abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(5):435 e431–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Nygaard I, Brubaker L, Zyczynski HM, et al. Long-term outcomes following abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. JAMA. 2013;309(19):2016–24.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 1685 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53705, USA

    Sarah McAchran MD

  2. Department of Urology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Courtenay Moore

Authors
  1. Sarah McAchran MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Courtenay Moore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah McAchran MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA

    Sara L. Best

  2. Department of Urology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA

    Stephen Y. Nakada

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

McAchran, S., Moore, C. (2015). Robotic Abdominal Sacrocolpopexy. In: Best, S., Nakada, S. (eds) Minimally Invasive Urology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1317-6_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1317-6_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-1316-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-1317-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation