Home
Abstract
My Abstract(s)
Login
ePosters
Back
Final Presentation Format
Podium Abstract
Eposter Presentation
Eposter in PDF Format
Accept format: PDF. The file size should not be more than 5MB
Eposter in Image Format
Accept format: PNG/JPG/WEBP. The file size should not be more than 2MB
Presentation Date / Time
Submission Status
Submitted
Abstract
Abstract Title
Comparison of Laparoscopic Pectopexy and Sacrocolpopexy in Apical Prolapse Management
Presentation Type
Podium Abstract
Manuscript Type
Case Study
Abstract Category *
Novel Advances: Laparoscopic Surgery
Author's Information
Number of Authors (including submitting/presenting author) *
8
No more than 10 authors can be listed (as per the Good Publication Practice (GPP) Guidelines).
Please ensure the authors are listed in the right order.
Country
India
Co-author 1
PRANANK KAKARLA pranank@yahoo.com RAMAIAH MEDICAL COLLEGE UROLOGY BENGALURU India *
Co-author 2
DRON SHARMA urologymsr@gmail.com RAMAIAH MEDICAL COLLEGE UROLOGY BENGALURU India -
Co-author 3
TARUN JAVALI tarunjavali@gmail.com RAMAIAH MEDICAL COLLEGE UROLOGY BENGALURU India -
Co-author 4
MANASA T manasat7@gmail.com RAMAIAH MEDICAL COLLEGE UROLOGY BENGALURU India -
Co-author 5
SANDEEP PUVVADA dr.sandeep001@gmail.com RAMAIAH MEDICAL COLLEGE UROLOGY BENGALURU India -
Co-author 6
ABHISHEK KULKARNI drabhishekkulkarni1606@gmail.com RAMAIAH MEDICAL COLLEGE UROLOGY BENGALURU India -
Co-author 7
PRASAD MYLARAPPA prasadmyluro2@gmail.com RAMAIAH MEDICAL COLLEGE UROLOGY BENGALURU India -
Co-author 8
RAMESH D urology761@gmail.com RAMAIAH MEDICAL COLLEGE UROLOGY BENGALURU India -
Co-author 9
-
Co-author 10
-
Co-author 11
-
Co-author 12
-
Co-author 13
-
Co-author 14
-
Co-author 15
-
Co-author 16
-
Co-author 17
-
Co-author 18
-
Co-author 19
-
Co-author 20
-
Abstract Content
Introduction
Sacrocolpopexy is often regarded as benchmark surgical approach for addressing apical prolapse, but it can be difficult in patients having extensive pelvic adhesions or colonic diverticulosis. Pectopexy serves as an alternative to sacrocolpopexy and may offer potential benefits to patients.
Materials and Methods
This was a retrospective review of 17 laparoscopic pectopexies and 23 laparoscopic sacrocolpopexies performed from January 2022 to January 2024 at an academic tertiary referral centre. The outcomes from laparoscopic pectopexy were compared with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy performed at the same institution by the same surgeons. Patients with symptomatic primary vault prolapse POP-Q >1 were considered for this study. Patients with previous operations for vault prolapse correction were excluded from consideration. In pectopexy a Maltese cross pattern mesh is attached to anterior and posterior wall of vagina with arms attached to right and left pectineal ligaments. The primary outcome was recurrent prolapse (stage ll or greater). The Secondary outcomes were rate of urinary retention requiring intervention, rate of mesh related complications, rate of de novo constipation, rate of de novo stress urinary incontinence, overall complication rates as well as average operative time.
Results
Demographic data between both groups were similar with comparable POP-Q prolapse stage. Urinary retention requiring intervention was seen 8.69% of patients who underwent sacrocolpopexy whereas no patients in pectopexy group experienced this complication. There were no mesh related complications in pectopexy group, whereas, 4.34% of the patients in sacrocolpopexy had mesh related complications. De-novo constipation was seen in 21.7% of the patients who underwent sacrocolpopexy and none of the patients who underwent pectopexy had such problems. De-novo stress urinary incontinence was exclusively seen in patients who underwent sacrocolpopexy(8.69%). Recurrent prolapse was seen among 5.88% of patients who underwent pectopexy and 13.04% of patients who underwent sacrocolpopexy at most recent follow-up. The overall complication rate was 5.88% in pectopexy patients and 30.0% in sacrocolpopexy patients. The average operative times were 135 minutes for pectopexy and 162.73 minutes for sacrocolpopexy. The average lengths of follow-up were 12 months and 13.3 months for pectopexy and sacrocolpopexy respectively
Conclusions
Because the pectopexy procedure is carried out entirely in the anterior pelvis, it avoids dissection in the deeper pelvic regions. This also means that dissection of the presacral space is avoided, which helps to minimize the risk of bleeding, minimise injury to hypogastric nerves, less steep Trendelenburg position and placement of the mesh relatively distant from the colon. Even though sacrocolpopexy continues to be the gold standard operation for apical prolapse, according to our data, pectopexy can offer excellent results. Hence, in lieu of these findings, we can confidently counsel our patients regarding pectopexy producing better results to a sacrocolpopexy with less chances of de novo constipation and less overall complication rates.
Keywords
Laparoscopic Pectopexy Sacrocolpopexy Apical Prolapse Management
Figure 1
Figure 1 Caption
Figure 2
Figure 2 Caption
Figure 3
Figure 3 Caption
Figure 4
Figure 4 Caption
Figure 5
Figure 5 Caption
Character Count
2102
Vimeo Link
Presentation Details
Session
Free Paper Podium(21): BPH & Novel Advances (B)
Date
Aug. 17 (Sun.)
Time
11:30 - 11:36
Presentation Order
11