Abstract
The demand for surgical correction of pelvic organ prolapse is expected to grow as the population ages yet remains active and focused on quality of life. Definitive correction of pelvic organ prolapse can be accomplished through both vaginal and abdominal approaches. Patient factors and preferences as well as surgeon experience and comfort often dictate the nature and extent of the repair. While there is no universally accepted “ideal” approach, the preponderance of data cites the superiority of abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) in the durable correction of apical and multicompartment prolapse. Unfortunately, the “gold standard” open ASC is comparatively morbid and both patients and providers have trended toward transvaginal reconstruction, particularly during the era of seemingly simplistic “mesh-based kits.” The application of robotics and the pervasive concern regarding the transvaginal placement of synthetic mesh have revitalized and emboldened sacrocolpopexy. This chapter serves as a contemporary reference that specifically addresses the rationale, diagnostic algorithm, and therapeutic options for the treatment of female pelvic organ prolapse. Emphasis will be placed on the role and technique of abdominal-based reconstruction using a minimally invasive approach.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, et al. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89:501.
Adams SR, Dramitinos P, Shapiro A, et al. Do patient goals vary with degree of prolapse? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205:502.
Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, et al. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women (review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(4):CD004014.
Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:805.
Mueller ER. Why complex pelvic organ prolapse should be approached abdominally. Curr Opin Urol. 2013;23:317.
Paraiso MF, Walters MD, Rackley RR, et al. Laparoscopic and abdominal sacral colpopexies: a comparative cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:1752.
Elterman DS, Chughtai BI, Vertosick E, et al. Changes in pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the last decade among United States Urologists. J Urol. 2014;191:1022.
Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(1):10.
Richardson ML, Elliott CS, Shaw JG, et al. To sling or not to sling at time of abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Urol. 2013;190:1306.
Clarke-Pearson DL, Abaid LN. Prevention of venous thromboembolic events after gynecologic surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;199:155.
Geller EJ, Parnell BA, Dunivan GC. Robotic vs abdominal sacrocolpopexy: 44-month pelvic floor outcomes. Urology. 2012;79:532.
Lee RK, Mottrie A, Payne CK, et al. A review of the current status of laparoscopic and robot-assisted Sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. Eur Urol. 2014 Jun;65(6):1128–37.
Serati M, Bogani G, Sorice P, et al. Robot-assisted Sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol. 2014;66(2):303–18.
Judd JP, Siddiqui NY, Barnett JC, et al. Cost-minimization analysis of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal sacrocolpopexy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010;17:493.
Elliott CS, Hsieh MH, Sokol ER, et al. Robot-assisted versus open sacrocolpopexy: a cost-minimization analysis. J Urol. 2012;187:638.
Hoyte L, Rabbanifard R, Mezzick J, et al. Cost analysis of open versus robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2012;18:335.
Paraiso MF, Jelovsek JE, Frick A, et al. Laparoscopic compared with robotic sacrocolpopexy for vaginal prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118:1005.
Anger JT, Mueller ER, Tarnay C, et al. Robotic compared with laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy: a Randomized Controlled Trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:5.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
White, W.M., Polin, M. (2020). Robotic/Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy. In: Firoozi, F. (eds) Female Pelvic Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28319-3_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28319-3_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-28318-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-28319-3
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)