Evaluation of Sacrospinous Hysteropexy vs. Uterosacral Suspension for the Treatment of Uterine Prolapse: A Retrospective Assessment

Abstract

Objective: This single-center retrospective study aimed to compare the outcomes of vaginal hysterectomy with utero-sacral suspension (VH/USS) versus sacro-spinous hysteropexy (SSHP) in the management of uterine prolapse at a tertiary care center specializing in Urogynecology. Methods: The medical records of 50 women with stage 2 or more uterine prolapse treated with VH/USS (n = 26) or SSHP (n = 24) were assessed between January 2006 and December 2012. Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of body mass index (BMI) and parity P = 0.881 and 0.304, respectively. VH/USS procedure was significantly more successful than SSHP procedure with regard to anatomical success (84.62 vs. 41.67%, P = 0.0028). There was a significantly higher anterior prolapse recurrence with SSHP procedure than with VH/USS (33.3 vs. 7.7%; P = 0.034). SSHP was associated with the lower likelihood of anatomical success and a higher risk of recurrent anterior prolapse in multivariate logistic regression analyzes adjusting for potential confounders. Conclusion: The findings of this retrospective study indicate that SSHP appears to be associated with less anatomical objective success and an increased risk of recurrent anterior prolapse in comparison to VH/USS. Further validation of our observations by independent investigators is required.