Long-Term Outcome of Anterior-Apical Mesh (Surelift) Versus Anterior Colporrhaphy and Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation in Advanced Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery.
{"title":"Long-Term Outcome of Anterior-Apical Mesh (Surelift) Versus Anterior Colporrhaphy and Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation in Advanced Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery.","authors":"Tsia-Shu Lo, Louiza Erika Rellora, Eyal Rom, Huan-Ka Chiung, Chia-Hsuan Yang, Yi-Hao Lin","doi":"10.1007/s00192-025-06105-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study first aims to compare the outcomes of Surelift (anterior-apical transvaginal mesh) and sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSF) with anterior repair using objective and subjective cure rates. Second, to compare the quality of life and its major and minor complications.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A retrospective study was conducted between December 2011 and January 2020. Patients with symptomatic stage ≥ 3 anterior or apical prolapse were included. Those who had prior POP mesh and who were unfit for surgery were excluded. Preoperative evaluation included history and physical exam, urodynamic studies, and validated questionnaires (IIQ-7, UDI-6, POPDI-6) at baseline, 1, 3, and 5 years later.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred eighty-one patients were included: 98 underwent anterior-apical transvaginal mesh and 83 had SSF with anterior colporrhaphy (SSF+A). Anterior-apical transvaginal mesh and SSF+A patients had mean follow-up periods of 83.5 ± 6.1 and 91.6 ± 39 months, respectively. At 1 year, no statistically significant difference was noted in objective and subjective cure rates between anterior-apical transvaginal mesh (96.8% and 94.7%) and SSF+A (89.9% and 88.6%). However, after 3 and 5 years, anterior-apical transvaginal mesh showed superior results with objective cure rates of 94.1% and 89.1%, respectively, compared to 80% and 64.4% for SSF+A (p = 0.008). At 3 and 5 years, anterior-apical transvaginal mesh had 92.9% and 85.9% subjective cure rates compared to SSF's 77.1% and 60%, respectively (p = 0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The long-term follow-up showed that native tissue repair was strongly associated with increased risk of recurrence compared to the anterior-apical mesh with minor complications in both groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":14355,"journal":{"name":"International Urogynecology Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urogynecology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-025-06105-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: This study first aims to compare the outcomes of Surelift (anterior-apical transvaginal mesh) and sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSF) with anterior repair using objective and subjective cure rates. Second, to compare the quality of life and its major and minor complications.
Material and methods: A retrospective study was conducted between December 2011 and January 2020. Patients with symptomatic stage ≥ 3 anterior or apical prolapse were included. Those who had prior POP mesh and who were unfit for surgery were excluded. Preoperative evaluation included history and physical exam, urodynamic studies, and validated questionnaires (IIQ-7, UDI-6, POPDI-6) at baseline, 1, 3, and 5 years later.
Results: One hundred eighty-one patients were included: 98 underwent anterior-apical transvaginal mesh and 83 had SSF with anterior colporrhaphy (SSF+A). Anterior-apical transvaginal mesh and SSF+A patients had mean follow-up periods of 83.5 ± 6.1 and 91.6 ± 39 months, respectively. At 1 year, no statistically significant difference was noted in objective and subjective cure rates between anterior-apical transvaginal mesh (96.8% and 94.7%) and SSF+A (89.9% and 88.6%). However, after 3 and 5 years, anterior-apical transvaginal mesh showed superior results with objective cure rates of 94.1% and 89.1%, respectively, compared to 80% and 64.4% for SSF+A (p = 0.008). At 3 and 5 years, anterior-apical transvaginal mesh had 92.9% and 85.9% subjective cure rates compared to SSF's 77.1% and 60%, respectively (p = 0.005).
Conclusions: The long-term follow-up showed that native tissue repair was strongly associated with increased risk of recurrence compared to the anterior-apical mesh with minor complications in both groups.
期刊介绍:
The International Urogynecology Journal is the official journal of the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA).The International Urogynecology Journal has evolved in response to a perceived need amongst the clinicians, scientists, and researchers active in the field of urogynecology and pelvic floor disorders. Gynecologists, urologists, physiotherapists, nurses and basic scientists require regular means of communication within this field of pelvic floor dysfunction to express new ideas and research, and to review clinical practice in the diagnosis and treatment of women with disorders of the pelvic floor. This Journal has adopted the peer review process for all original contributions and will maintain high standards with regard to the research published therein. The clinical approach to urogynecology and pelvic floor disorders will be emphasized with each issue containing clinically relevant material that will be immediately applicable for clinical medicine. This publication covers all aspects of the field in an interdisciplinary fashion