Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Prog Urol. 2016 Jul;26 Suppl 1:S73-88. doi: 10.1016/S1166-7087(16)30430-4.

[Does hysterectomy modifies the anatomical and functional outcomes of prolapse surgery?: Clinical Practice Guidelines].

[Article in French]

Author information

1
Service de gynécologie obstétrique, CHU Montpellier, hôpital Arnaud-de-Villeneuve, 371, avenue du Doyen-Gaston-Giraud, 34090 Montpellier, France. Electronic address: melanie.cayrac@hotmail.fr.
2
Service de gynécologie, CHRU Carémeau, rue du Professeur-Debré, 30029 Nîmes Cedex 9, France.
3
Service urologie, CHU Nantes, Place Alexis-Ricordeau, 44093 Nantes Cedex 1, France.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

Provide guidelines for clinical practice concerning hysterectomy during surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolaps, with or without mesh.

METHODS:

Systematically review of the literature concerning anatomical and functionnal results of uterine conservation or hysterectomie during surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolaps.

RESULTS:

Sacrospinous hysteropexy is as effective as vaginal hysterectomy and repair in retrospective comparative studies and in a meta-analysis with reduced operating time, blood loss and recovery time (NP2). However, in a single RCT there was a higher recurrence rate associated with sacrospinous hysteropexy compared with vaginal hysterectomy. Sacrospinous hysteropexy with mesh augmentation of the anterior compartment was as effective as hysterectomy and mesh augmentation (NP2), with no significant difference in the rate of mesh exposure between the groups (NP3). Sacral hysteropexy is as effective as sacral colpopexy and hysterectomy in anatomical outcomes; however, the sacral colpopexy and hysterectomy were associated with increase operating time and blood loss (NP1). Performing hysterectomy at sacral colpopexy was associated with a higher risk of mesh exposure compared with sacral colpopexy without hysterectomy (NP3). There is no sufficient data in the literature to affirm that the uterine conservation improve sexual function (NP3).

CONCLUSION:

While uterine preservation is a viable option for the surgical management of uterine prolapse the evidence on safety and efficacy is currently lacking. © 2016 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.

KEYWORDS:

Apical prolapse; Conservation utérine; Cystocele; Cystocèle; Hysterectomy; Hystérectomie; Hystéroptose; Mesh; Pelvic organ prolapse; Prolapsus; Prolapsus apical; Prolapsus vaginal; Promontofixation; Prothèse; Rectocele; Rectocèle; Sacral hysteropexy; Sacrocolpopexy; Sacrospinous hysteropexy; Uterine prolapse; Vaginal prolapse

PMID:
27595628
DOI:
10.1016/S1166-7087(16)30430-4
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center