Facts, Views & Vision
in ObGyn

Journal of the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy

esge_logo

Practice of laparoscopic prolapse surgery in Europe – ESGE Survey

B. Lambert1, L. de Landsheere1, GK. Noé2, R. Devassy3, H. Ferreira4, J. Dubuisson5, J. Deprest6, R. Botchorishvili7

1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Liège, CHR Citadelle, 4000 Liège, Belgium
2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Witten-Herdercke, 41540 Dormagen, Germany
3 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Dubai London Clinic and Speciality Hospital, 12119 Dubai, United Arab Emirates
4 Department of Minimally Invasive Surgery Unit of Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, 4099 Porto, 12 Portugal
5 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals of Geneva, 1205, Geneva, Switzerland
6 Pelvic Floor Unit, University Hospitals Leuven, and Cluster Urogenital Surgery, Department Development and Regeneration, Biomedical sciences, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
7 Department of Gynecological Surgery, University Hospital Estaing, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France

Keywords:

Prolapse surgery, sacrocolpopexy, pectopexy, lateral suspension, meshless laparoscopic repair, survey


Published online: Sep 24 2023

https://doi.org/10.52054/FVVO.15.3.087

Abstract

Sacrocolpopexy is considered as the “gold standard” for management of women with apical prolapse. Numerous technical variants are being practiced. The first aim of this survey was to determine the habits of practice of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSCP) in Europe. The second aim was to determine whether surgeons who perform laparoscopic pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair are familiar with the practice of alternative techniques and with mesh-less laparoscopic treatment of prolapse. The questionnaire was designed by the Urogynaecology Special Interest Group of the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE). All ESGE-members were invited by email to respond to this survey consisting of 54 questions divided in different categories. Following review of ESGE member’s responses, we have highlighted the great heterogeneity concerning the practice of LSCP and important variability in performance of concomitant surgeries. Alternative techniques are rarely used in practice. Furthermore, the lack of standardisation of the many surgical steps of a laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy is mainly due to the lack of evidence. There is a need for training and teaching in both standard and newer innovative techniques as well as the reporting of medium and long-term outcomes of both standard laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and any of its alternatives.