REVIEWS   

Minerva Ginecologica 2008 December;60(6):509-28

Copyright © 2008 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Hysteropexy. A review

Ridgeway B., Frick A. C., Walter M. D.

Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women’s Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA

Uterine prolapse is a common problem in women that negatively affects one’s quality of life. Surgical treatment commonly involves a hysterectomy followed by vaginal vault suspension of some type. Hysteropexy to treat uterovaginal prolapse has a long history dating back to the 1800s and has gone through many changes. Recent literature describes vaginal, open abdominal and laparoscopic approaches. Vaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy is well-supported by the scientific literature. Favorable postoperative outcomes range from 62-100% and additional data show improved quality of life and sexual function. Anatomic outcomes appear to be comparable to vaginal hysterectomy with sacrospinous ligament vault suspension. Additionally, encouraging outcomes following pregnancy have been described. The sacrohysteropexy, performed through a laparotomy incision or laparoscopically, also has favorable data, with cure rates ranging from 91-100%. Studies supporting this procedure also describe improvements in quality of life and sexual function. Complications related to these procedures are similar to those described after vaginal vault suspension using comparable techniques, although most studies report shorter operative times and less blood loss. At the present time, hysteropexy, either transvaginal or abdominal, seems to be a safe procedure with acceptable results in women who desire uterine preservation. As these procedures gain popularity and data become available, questions related to patient selection, surgical durability, outcomes following pregnancy, and complications related to risk of uterine pathology will likely be answered.