2016 Jul-Aug;22: 182-9), a randomized, controlled superiority trial of vaginal hysterectomy with suture apical suspension versus uterine conservation with vaginal mesh (Boston Scientific's Uphold LITE) hysteropexy
for uterovaginal prolapse.
It is crossed by the left common iliac vein and care should be taken during hysteropexy
and colpopexy operations.
Hysterectomy versus hysteropexy. Considerable debate exists regarding whether a patient requires hysterectomy at the time of prolapse repair.
Gutman and colleagues compared laparoscopic mesh hysteropexy with TVM; they demonstrated comparable cure rates and, again, significantly longer operative times for the laparoscopic approach (174 vs 64 minutes; P<.0001).
Manchester repair, sacrospinous hysteropexy and abdominal or laparoscopic hysteropexy are available options.
Laparoscopic hysteropexy: the initial results of a uterine suspension procedure for uterovaginal prolapse.
has been proposed to be an alternative approach for uterine-preserving prolapse surgery (7).
is performed for patients who desire preservation of the uterus.
and vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension were found to be comparable at 12 months after surgery in this large randomized trial involving 208 women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher requiring surgery and no history of pelvic floor surgery.
(2,3) Other indications for synthetic vaginal mesh include vaginal hysteropexy