Acknowledgements
The authors are thankful for the assistance in accommodating study patients for office visits by the Hartford Hospital Urogynecology office staff, and especially for Colleen Mellen, APRN, for her contribution to performing a portion of the study visits.
References
1. Smith F, Holman C, Moorin R, Tsokos N. Lifetime risk of undergoing surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Obs Gynecol . 2010;116:1096-1100.
2. US Food and Drug Administration. Urogynecologic Surgical Mesh: Update on the Safety and Effectiveness of Transvaginal Placement for Pelvic Organ Prolapse .; 2011. https://www.fda.gov/media/81123/download.
3. Siddiqui N, Grimes C, Casiano E, et al. Mesh sacrocolpopexy compared with native tissue vaginal repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Society of Gynecologic Surgeons Systematic Review Group.Obs Gynecol . 2015;125:44-55.
4. Nygaard I, Brubaker L, Zyczynski H, et al. Long-term outcomes following abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse.JAMA . 2013;309(19):2016-2024.
5. Culligan P, Salamon C, Priestley J, Shariati A. Porcine dermis compared with polypropylene mesh for laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Obs Gynecol . 2013;121(1):143-151.
6. Tate S, Blackwell L, Lorenz D, Steptoe M, Culligan P. Randomized trial of fascia lata and polypropylene mesh for abdominal sacrocolpopexy: 5-year follow-up. Int Urogynecol J . 2011;22(2):137-143.
7. Seth J, Toia B, Ecclestone H, et al. The autologous rectus fascia sheath sacrocolpopexy and sacrohysteropexy, a mesh free alternative in patients with recurrent uterine and vault prolapse: A contemporary series and literature review. 2019:193-197. doi:10.4103/UA.UA
8. Quiroz LH, Gutman RE, Shippey S, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: anatomic outcomes and complications with Pelvicol, autologous and synthetic graft materials. Am J Obs Gynecol . 2020;198(5):557.e1-5.
9. U.S. Food & Drug Administration. Urogynecologic Surgical Mesh Implants. https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/implants-and-prosthetics/urogynecologic-surgical-mesh-implants. Published 2019. Accessed October 20, 2020.
10. Winkelman W, Modest A, Richardson M. U.S. Food and Drug Administration Statements About Transvaginal Mesh and Changes in Apical Prolapse Surgery. Obs Gynecol . 2019;134(4):745-752.
11. Yaqub U, Shahzad N. Uterine suspension by rectus sheath flap, in selected cases of UV prolapse. PJMHS . 2013;7:322-333.
12. Jenkins D, McCoubrie S. Vault prolapse: a new approach. Aust N Z J Surg . 1992;62:805-808.
13. Mahendru R. An effective and safe innovation for the management of vault prolapse. Ann Surg Innov Res . 2010;4:6.
14. Oliver J, Chaundhry Z, Medendorp A, et al. Complete excision of sacrocolpopexy mesh with autologous fascia sacrocolpopexy.Urology . 2017;106:65-69.
15. Huang Y, Lin A, Chen K, Pan C, Chang L. High failure rate using allograft fascia lata in pubovaginal sling surgery for female stress urinary incontinence. Urology . 2001;58:943-946.
16. Fitzgerald M, Mollenhauer J, Bitterman P, Brubaker L. Functional failure of fascia lata allografts. Am J Obs Gynecol . 1999;181:1339-1345.
17. Chai TC, Albo ME, Richter HE, et al. Complications in Women Undergoing Burch Colposuspension Versus Autologous Rectus Fascia Sling for the Treatment of Stress Urinary Incontinence. 2009;181(5):2192-2197. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2009.01.019.Complications
18. Nosti P, Umoh Andy U, Kane S, et al. Outcomes of abdominal and minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: a retrospective cohort study.Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg . 2014;20(1):33-37.
19. Rosman M, Rachminov O, Segal O, Segal G. Prolonged patients’ In-Hospital Waiting Period after discharge eligibility is associated with increased risk of infection, morbidity and mortality: a retrospective cohort analysis. BMC Heal Serv Res . 2015;15:246.
20. Committee on Gynecologic Practice. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 750: Perioperative Pathways: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery. Obs Gynecol . 2018;132(3):e120-e130.
21. Varadhan K, Neal K, Dejong C, Fearon K, Ljungqvist O, Lobo D. The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway for patients undergoing major elective open colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Nutr . 2010;29:434-440.
22. Miralpeix E, Nick A, Meyer L, et al. A call for new standard of care in perioperative gynecologic oncology practice: Impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs. Gynecol Oncol . 2016;141(2):371-378.
23. Berger A, Tan-Kim J, Menefee S. Comparison of 30-Day Readmission After Same-Day Compared With Next-Day Discharge in Minimally Invasive Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery. Obs Gynecol . 2020;135(6):1327-1337.
Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier curve for composite failure
Figure 2. Kaplan-Meier curve for anatomic failure
Figure 3. Kaplan-Meier curve for symptomatic failure
Figure 4. Kaplan-Meier curve for retreatment
Table 1. Characteristics of study population
Table 2. Composite failure, retreatment, anatomic failure, and symptomatic failure outcomes
Table 3. Secondary subjective and objective outcomes
Table 4. Post-operative complications (N=132)