Home > Journals > Minerva Medica > Past Issues > Minerva Medica 2021 August;112(4) > Minerva Medica 2021 August;112(4):483-91



Publishing options
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian


Publication history
Cite this article as



Minerva Medica 2021 August;112(4):483-91

DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4806.20.06561-1


language: English

Minimally invasive surgery in urogynecology: a comparison of standard laparoscopic, minilaparoscopic, percutaneous surgical system, and robotic sacral colpopexy

Giovanni PANICO 1, Giuseppe CAMPAGNA 1 , Lorenzo VACCA 1, Daniela CARAMAZZA 1, Vito IANNONE 2, Cristiano ROSSITTO 1, Valerio RUMOLO 1, Giovanni SCAMBIA 3, 4, Alfredo ERCOLI 5

1 Columbus Unit of Gynecologic Surgery, Department of Women and Child’s Health, IRCCS A. Gemelli University Polyclinic Foundation, Rome, Italy; 2 Unit of Obstetrics and Gynecology, S. Antonio Abate Hospital, Erice, Trapani, Italy; 3 Unit of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Women and Child’s Health, IRCCS A. Gemelli University Polyclinic Foundation, Rome, Italy; 4 Sacred Heart Catholic University, Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rome, Italy; 5 Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Minimally-Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, University of Messina, G. Martino Polyclinic, Messina, Italy

BACKGROUND: We compared surgical outcome of sacral colpopexy (SCP) performed with the most recent minimally invasive surgery such as 3-mm laparoscopy (Mini-LPS), percutaneous system (PSS), standard laparoscopy (LPS), and robotic surgery.
METHODS: This is a multicenter retrospective cohort study conducted at Urogynecological Department of the IRCCS A. Gemelli University Polyclinic Foundation in Rome and at the Gynecological Clinic of Maggiore della Carità Hospital in Novara, and of the Polyclinic of Abano. We collected data of 115 patients who underwent laparoscopic SCP for pelvic organ prolapse between June 2017 and June 2018 using PSS, Mini-LPS, standard LPS, and da Vinci Si.
RESULTS: Patients of all four groups had similar characteristics. The median operative time (OT) was significantly longer in robotic procedure compared to all other groups There were no significant differences between the four groups in terms of estimated blood loss, conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative complications and median postoperative ileus. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 4 hours was significantly less for Mini-LPS compared to the other techniques. VAS at 24 hours was higher for robotic procedures than other techniques.
CONCLUSIONS: Results rule out that minimize surgical invasiveness of laparoscopic techniques could bring improvements in SCP not only from a cosmetic point of view but also from a functional one without requiring longer OT and maintaining the same standard laparoscopic configuration. Even if robotic SCP is useful and safe because of its guarantee of efficiency, it cannot be considered the first choice for many women.

KEY WORDS: Laparoscopy; Minimally invasive surgical procedures; Pelvic organ prolapse; Sacrum

top of page