Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a comparative study

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Ferreira, Hélder
Data de Publicação: 2016
Outros Autores: Ferreira, Carlos, Silva, Cristina Isabel Nogueira, Tomé, António, Guimarães, Serafim, Correia-Pinto, Jorge
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/1822/46104
Resumo: Introduction and Aims: We aim to compare clinical and surgical outcomes between minilaparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (MLSC) and conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC). As far as we know, no comparative study exists between these two minimal invasive procedures to correct vaginal prolapse. Design and Setting: An observational and comparative study with 20 individuals submitted to vaginal vault prolapse correction between June and December of 2014 in our tertiary referral unit. Nine women were submitted to 3-mm MLSC and the others were approached by a standard 5-mm laparoscopic technique. Materials and Methods: Women's demographic data and prolapse grade were evaluated preoperatively using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification score. Operative parameters (surgical time, blood loss, and complications under Satava and Clavien-Dindo classification) and length of hospitalization were also compared. Postoperative pain and surgical scar satisfaction were measured using Visual Analog Pain Scale and Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Questionnaire, respectively. Results: MLSC took approximately the same time as LSC (P > .05). No significant differences in operative time, blood loss, length of hospitalization, and complications (Satava, Clavien-Dindo) were observed between both groups. Pain score after surgery was similar in MLSC and LSC (P > .05). Surgical scar monitoring at 3 months established that MLSC produced better overall results than LSC (P < .05). Anatomic cure rate was 100%. Conclusion: Minilaparoscopy is a feasible and attractive approach for sacrocolpopexy as it enhances cosmetics, keeping the low morbidity associated with the classical laparoscopic approaches. © Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 2016.
id RCAP_933bacf6a961aa26917af4ac50cc04d9
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt:1822/46104
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a comparative studyScience & TechnologyIntroduction and Aims: We aim to compare clinical and surgical outcomes between minilaparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (MLSC) and conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC). As far as we know, no comparative study exists between these two minimal invasive procedures to correct vaginal prolapse. Design and Setting: An observational and comparative study with 20 individuals submitted to vaginal vault prolapse correction between June and December of 2014 in our tertiary referral unit. Nine women were submitted to 3-mm MLSC and the others were approached by a standard 5-mm laparoscopic technique. Materials and Methods: Women's demographic data and prolapse grade were evaluated preoperatively using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification score. Operative parameters (surgical time, blood loss, and complications under Satava and Clavien-Dindo classification) and length of hospitalization were also compared. Postoperative pain and surgical scar satisfaction were measured using Visual Analog Pain Scale and Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Questionnaire, respectively. Results: MLSC took approximately the same time as LSC (P > .05). No significant differences in operative time, blood loss, length of hospitalization, and complications (Satava, Clavien-Dindo) were observed between both groups. Pain score after surgery was similar in MLSC and LSC (P > .05). Surgical scar monitoring at 3 months established that MLSC produced better overall results than LSC (P < .05). Anatomic cure rate was 100%. Conclusion: Minilaparoscopy is a feasible and attractive approach for sacrocolpopexy as it enhances cosmetics, keeping the low morbidity associated with the classical laparoscopic approaches. © Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 2016.info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersionMary Ann Liebert Inc.Universidade do MinhoFerreira, HélderFerreira, CarlosSilva, Cristina Isabel NogueiraTomé, AntónioGuimarães, SerafimCorreia-Pinto, Jorge20162016-01-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/1822/46104eng1092-642910.1089/lap.2015.038126845535http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/lap.2015.0381info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-07-21T12:51:55Zoai:repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt:1822/46104Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T19:50:56.139039Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a comparative study
title Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a comparative study
spellingShingle Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a comparative study
Ferreira, Hélder
Science & Technology
title_short Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a comparative study
title_full Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a comparative study
title_fullStr Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a comparative study
title_full_unstemmed Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a comparative study
title_sort Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a comparative study
author Ferreira, Hélder
author_facet Ferreira, Hélder
Ferreira, Carlos
Silva, Cristina Isabel Nogueira
Tomé, António
Guimarães, Serafim
Correia-Pinto, Jorge
author_role author
author2 Ferreira, Carlos
Silva, Cristina Isabel Nogueira
Tomé, António
Guimarães, Serafim
Correia-Pinto, Jorge
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidade do Minho
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Ferreira, Hélder
Ferreira, Carlos
Silva, Cristina Isabel Nogueira
Tomé, António
Guimarães, Serafim
Correia-Pinto, Jorge
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Science & Technology
topic Science & Technology
description Introduction and Aims: We aim to compare clinical and surgical outcomes between minilaparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (MLSC) and conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC). As far as we know, no comparative study exists between these two minimal invasive procedures to correct vaginal prolapse. Design and Setting: An observational and comparative study with 20 individuals submitted to vaginal vault prolapse correction between June and December of 2014 in our tertiary referral unit. Nine women were submitted to 3-mm MLSC and the others were approached by a standard 5-mm laparoscopic technique. Materials and Methods: Women's demographic data and prolapse grade were evaluated preoperatively using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification score. Operative parameters (surgical time, blood loss, and complications under Satava and Clavien-Dindo classification) and length of hospitalization were also compared. Postoperative pain and surgical scar satisfaction were measured using Visual Analog Pain Scale and Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Questionnaire, respectively. Results: MLSC took approximately the same time as LSC (P > .05). No significant differences in operative time, blood loss, length of hospitalization, and complications (Satava, Clavien-Dindo) were observed between both groups. Pain score after surgery was similar in MLSC and LSC (P > .05). Surgical scar monitoring at 3 months established that MLSC produced better overall results than LSC (P < .05). Anatomic cure rate was 100%. Conclusion: Minilaparoscopy is a feasible and attractive approach for sacrocolpopexy as it enhances cosmetics, keeping the low morbidity associated with the classical laparoscopic approaches. © Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 2016.
publishDate 2016
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2016
2016-01-01T00:00:00Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/1822/46104
url http://hdl.handle.net/1822/46104
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 1092-6429
10.1089/lap.2015.0381
26845535
http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/lap.2015.0381
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Mary Ann Liebert Inc.
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Mary Ann Liebert Inc.
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799133095257964544