INSTITUTIONAL EXPERIENCE WITH LAPAROSCOPIC ANTERIOR VAGINOCERVICOPEXY USING A MESH IMPLANT IN PATIENTS WITH ANTERIOR COMPARTMENT DEFECT AND APICAL PROLAPSE OF VARYING SEVERITY

Yurii O.  Chekhanov; Oleksandr Yu.  Chekhanov; Igor Z.  Gladchuk

doi:10.21272/eumj.2026;14(2);382-389

Yurii O. Chekhanov Odesa National Medical University, Odesa, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0009-0000-7742-1899
Oleksandr Yu. Chekhanov Odesa National Medical University, Odesa, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0009-0007-2402-2094
Igor Z. Gladchuk Odesa National Medical University, Odesa, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2926-4125

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21272/eumj.2026;14(2);382-389

Keywords: Pelvic Organ Prolapse; Cystocele; Vaginal Vault Prolapse; Surgical Mesh; Laparoscopy; Hysterectomy; Reconstructive Surgical Procedures; Treatment Outcome; Postoperative Complications; Recurrence

Abstract

Introduction. In reconstructive pelvic floor surgery using synthetic implants, several laparoscopic techniques have evolved as alternatives to sacrocolpopexy. Laparoscopic vaginocervicopexy is intended to correct apical descent together with anterior compartment failure. Since its first publication, the technique has been repeatedly modified, emphasizing the need to evaluate outcomes of different technical refinements across clinical scenarios. The aim of this study was to report a single-center experience with a modified laparoscopic vaginocervicopexy technique and to assess its effectiveness in relation to defect location and severity.

Methods. Outcomes of 137 women with apical and combined prolapse (apical defect with cystocele), including women with a preserved uterus and women after hysterectomy, operated on in 2018–2024 were analyzed. The modification included intraoperative individualization of mesh dimensions based on measured dissection length and width, followed by bilateral fixation to the aponeurosis of the anterior abdominal wall. The assessment included intraoperative and postoperative complications, recurrences, repeat surgeries, operative time, length of hospital stay, and patient-reported satisfaction measured with a standardized satisfaction questionnaire using a five-point response scale. Mean follow-up was 12.8 months.

Results. Mean age at surgery was 61.56 ± 9.59 years. The complication rate was 1.46 %, and the recurrence rate was 3.65 %. Mean operative time was 90.36 ± 14.33 minutes, and mean hospitalization duration was 52.20 ± 6.27 hours. Intraoperative blood loss did not exceed 150 mL. Patient-reported satisfaction was high, with a mean score of 4.54 ± 0.41 points, without meaningful differences across clinical groups.

Discussion. The modified laparoscopic vaginocervicopexy with individualized mesh sizing and bilateral fixation to the anterior abdominal wall aponeurosis demonstrated favorable mid-term outcomes, combining high effectiveness with low complication and recurrence rates in women with apical prolapse and cystocele.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Wang B, Chen Y, Zhu X, Wang T, Li M, Huang Y, Xue L, Zhu Q, Gao X, Wu M. Global burden and trends of pelvic organ prolapse associated with aging women: an observational trend study from 1990 to 2019. Front Public Health. 2022;10:975829. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.975829.

Hadizadeh-Talasaz Z, Khadivzadeh T, Mohajeri T, Sadeghi M. Worldwide prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Iran J Public Health. 2024;53(3):524-538. https://doi.org/10.18502/ijph.v53i3.15134.

Xu Y, Xie S, Zhou C, et al. Time trends in the incidence of pelvic organ prolapse across the BRICS: an age-period-cohort analysis for the GBD 2019. BMC Public Health. 2025;25(1):592. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-21271-5.

Renaud de Tayrac R, Antosh DD, Baessler K, Cheon C, Deffieux X, Gutman R, Lee J, Nager C, Schizas A, Sung V, et al. Summary: 2021 International Consultation on Incontinence Evidence-Based Surgical Pathway for Pelvic Organ Prolapse. J Clin Med. 2022;11(20):6106. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11206106.

Developed by the Joint Writing Group of the American Urogynecologic Society and the International Urogynecological Association. Joint report on terminology for surgical procedures to treat pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31(3):429-463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-020-04236-1.

Dallenbach P. Laparoscopic lateral suspension (LLS) for the treatment of apical prolapse: a new gold standard? Front Surg. 2022;9:898392. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.898392.

Simoncini T, Panattoni A, Cadenbach-Blome T, Caiazzo N, Calero Garcia M, Caretto M, Chun F, Francescangeli E, Gaia G, Giannini A, Hegenscheid L, Luisi S, Mannella P, Mereu L, Montt-Guevara MM, Niguez I, Ritter R, Russo E, Sanchez Lopez Ferrer ML, Tammaa A, Uhl B, Wiedemann B, Wilczak M, Pauli F, Dubuisson J. Role of lateral suspension for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: a Delphi survey of expert panel. Surg Endosc. 2024;38(8):4344-4352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-10917-5.

Luo C, Wei D, Chen Y, Mei L, Niu X. Laparoscopic lateral suspension (Dubuisson) in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Gynecol Obstet Clin Med. 2024;4(2):e000010. https://doi.org/10.1136/gocm-2024-000010.

Dubuisson J, Dubuisson JB. Laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh for the management of pelvic organ prolapse: an educative video (case report). Gynecol Pelvic Med. 2022;5:11. https://doi.org/10.21037/gpm-21-6.

Mang C, Huemer H, Birkenmaier A, et al. Laparoscopic lateral suspension: a single-site and single-surgeon experience. Gynecol Surg. 2019;16:13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s10397-019-1067-7