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)