Robot-assisted sacrohysteropexy vs robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy in women with primary advanced apical prolapse: A retrospective cohort study

I. San Chan, Guan Yeu Chen, Ying Chu Shih, Ling Yu Jiang, Yen Hou Chang, Tzu Ya Wang, Yi Jen Chen*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Scopus citations


Background: This study aimed to evaluate the anatomic and clinical outcomes of robot-assisted sacrohysteropexy (RASH) against robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy (RASC) for the treatment of primary advanced apical prolapse. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all robot-assisted pelvic organ prolapse surgeries for primary advanced apical prolapse (stage ≥II) between January 2011 and May 2021 at an academic tertiary hospital. Surgical outcomes and pelvic organ function were evaluated using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantitative (POP-Q) stage and validated questionnaires (POPDI-6) during preoperative and postoperative 12-month follow-up evaluations. All data were obtained from electronic medical records. Results: A total of 2368 women underwent surgery for apical prolapse repair, and 18 women underwent either RASH (n = 11) or RASC (n = 7). Compared to the RASC group, the RASH group was significantly younger, premenopausal, and less parous. Preoperative prolapse stage, operative time, estimated blood loss, and hospitalization length was comparable between the groups. No intraoperative complications were observed. All women had a median follow-up duration of 24 months (range: 12-108 months). During the 12-month follow-up period, women in the RASH group reported higher satisfaction with the surgery than those in the RASC group (100% vs. 71.4%, p = 0.137). The mesh exposure rate was significantly higher in the RASC group (3/7, 42.9%) than in the RASH group (0/11, 0%) (p = 0.043), which was found at 12 to 36 months postoperatively and was successfully managed with vaginal estrogen cream. In the RASH group, one woman required reoperation with anterior colporrhaphy for recurrent anterior prolapse at 60 months postoperatively. The apical success rate was 100% at one year postoperatively, without apical recurrence in either group during the follow-up period. Conclusion: RASH represents an effective and feasible option for the surgical treatment of advanced primary apical prolapse in women who desire uterine preservation and have a significantly lower risk of mesh erosion than RASC.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)418-425
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of the Chinese Medical Association
Issue number4
StatePublished - 1 Apr 2023


  • Apical prolapse
  • Pelvic organ prolapse
  • Robotic
  • Sacrocolpopexy
  • Sacrohysteropexy


Dive into the research topics of 'Robot-assisted sacrohysteropexy vs robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy in women with primary advanced apical prolapse: A retrospective cohort study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this