DOI 10.1007/s00192-025-06440-3
Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse by Robotic Sacrocolpopexy: Long-Term Outcomes.
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION
Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common condition in women, often associated with substantial morbidity. Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy (RASC) has been developed as a minimally invasive option for POP repair, potentially improving outcomes compared with conventional techniques. This study aimed to assess long-term anatomical and functional results of RASC in a single-institution cohort.
METHODS
A retrospective cohort study was conducted including women aged ≥18 years with symptomatic POP stages II-IV who underwent RASC between 2016 and 2021. Patients with a minimum follow-up of 4 years were analyzed. The primary endpoint was anatomical and subjective correction of POP. Secondary outcomes included perioperative complications, functional outcomes, and patient satisfaction. Data were obtained from clinical interviews, physical examinations, and validated questionnaires.
RESULTS
Forty-five patients were included, with a mean age of 64.7 years and a median follow-up of 55 months. Most patients had advanced prolapse, with 73.3% presenting grade III and 22.3% grade IV according to the Baden-Walker classification. Anatomical and subjective correction was achieved in 88.9% of cases, with only one patient requiring reintervention for recurrence. Early complications occurred in 6.7% of patients, all Clavien-Dindo grade I-II. Late complications included de novo constipation (15.6%) and urinary symptoms (22.2%). Overall, 95.6% of patients reported improvement and high satisfaction postoperatively.
CONCLUSION
RASC is a safe and effective option for the treatment of POP, providing durable anatomical and functional improvements with high patient satisfaction at long-term follow-up.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.