TY - JOUR
T1 - Pelvic Floor Function Before and After Robotic Sacrocolpopexy
T2 - One-Year Outcomes
AU - Geller, Elizabeth J.
AU - Parnell, Brent A.
AU - Dunivan, Gena C.
N1 - Funding Information:
This project was supported by Award Number 2KR100905 from the National Center for Research Resources . The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Center for Research Resources or the National Institutes of Health.
Funding Information:
There are no conflicts of interest to disclose. The project described was supported by Award Number UL1RR025747 from the National Center for Research Resources , Grant Number 2KR100905 . The findings will be presented at the 2010 American Urogynecology Society Scientific Meeting to be held from September 30 – October 2, 2010 in Long Beach, California.
PY - 2011/5
Y1 - 2011/5
N2 - Study objective: Estimate pelvic floor function and support 1 year after robotic sacrocolpopexy. Design: Prospective cohort analysis of women undergoing robotic sacrocolpopexy for correction of advanced pelvic organ prolapse (Canadian Task Force Classification III). Primary outcome was pelvic floor function. Secondary outcomes included anatomic support and long-term surgical failures and complications. Setting: One university hospital in the southeastern United States. Patients: Primarily postmenopausal women (mean age 60) with advanced pelvic organ prolapse. Interventions: All subjects underwent robotic sacrocolpopexy during the study period. Subjects then underwent 1-year postoperative assessment of pelvic floor function via validated condition-specific quality of life questionnaires and assessment of pelvic floor support, long-term surgical failures, and complications via physical examination. Measurements and main results: From November 2007 to April 2009, there were 28 subjects, 25 of whom (89.3%) were evaluated. Mean time since surgery was 14.8 months. Pelvic floor function remained significantly improved over preoperative baseline: PFDI-20 (117 vs 38, p <001), PFIQ-7 (60 vs 10, p = .001), with stable high sexual function: PISQ-12 (34 vs. 36, p = .17), and improved pelvic support on POP-Q: Ba (+3 vs -2, p = .001), Bp (+0.5 vs -1, p = .092), C (+2.25 vs -8, p = .001). Anatomic cure for vault prolapse was 100% at 1 year. There were two mesh exposures and two subsequent prolapse surgeries. Conclusion: Robotic sacrocolpopexy demonstrates durable improvement in pelvic floor function and support, with high sexual function and reasonable failure and complication rates 1 year after surgery.
AB - Study objective: Estimate pelvic floor function and support 1 year after robotic sacrocolpopexy. Design: Prospective cohort analysis of women undergoing robotic sacrocolpopexy for correction of advanced pelvic organ prolapse (Canadian Task Force Classification III). Primary outcome was pelvic floor function. Secondary outcomes included anatomic support and long-term surgical failures and complications. Setting: One university hospital in the southeastern United States. Patients: Primarily postmenopausal women (mean age 60) with advanced pelvic organ prolapse. Interventions: All subjects underwent robotic sacrocolpopexy during the study period. Subjects then underwent 1-year postoperative assessment of pelvic floor function via validated condition-specific quality of life questionnaires and assessment of pelvic floor support, long-term surgical failures, and complications via physical examination. Measurements and main results: From November 2007 to April 2009, there were 28 subjects, 25 of whom (89.3%) were evaluated. Mean time since surgery was 14.8 months. Pelvic floor function remained significantly improved over preoperative baseline: PFDI-20 (117 vs 38, p <001), PFIQ-7 (60 vs 10, p = .001), with stable high sexual function: PISQ-12 (34 vs. 36, p = .17), and improved pelvic support on POP-Q: Ba (+3 vs -2, p = .001), Bp (+0.5 vs -1, p = .092), C (+2.25 vs -8, p = .001). Anatomic cure for vault prolapse was 100% at 1 year. There were two mesh exposures and two subsequent prolapse surgeries. Conclusion: Robotic sacrocolpopexy demonstrates durable improvement in pelvic floor function and support, with high sexual function and reasonable failure and complication rates 1 year after surgery.
KW - Pelvic floor function
KW - Pelvic organ prolapse
KW - Robotic sacrocolpopexy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79955549636&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79955549636&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jmig.2011.01.008
DO - 10.1016/j.jmig.2011.01.008
M3 - Article
C2 - 21458389
AN - SCOPUS:79955549636
SN - 1553-4650
VL - 18
SP - 322
EP - 327
JO - Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists
JF - Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists
IS - 3
ER -