Comparison of functional outcomes after robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in women with a BMI below and above 30

Submitted: 11 May 2016
Accepted: 27 January 2017
Published: 15 February 2017
Abstract Views: 1131
PDF: 308
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Authors

The aim of this study was to assess the impact of body-mass index on robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (RALSCP). A retrospective study was conducted on women who underwent a RALSCP. Data were collected prospectively from 17 obese and 78 non-obese patients treated between January 2008 and January 2013. Obesity was defined as a body-mass index (BMI) of ≥30 kg/m2. Relationships with outcome analysed using Mann– Whitney U-test and Fisher’s exact test. The operating time was the same in both groups: 220 vs 200 min in the obese and non-obese groups, respectively (P=0.232). The median follow-up was 12 months in both non-obese and obese patients. Overall anatomic repair rate was 94.1% and 97.4% for obese and non-obese patients, respectively (P=0.95). The overall reoperation rate (including surgery for de novo urinary-stress incontinence) was 5.9% for obese vs 11.5% for non-obese patients (P=0.8). These findings suggest that RALSCP is a viable option for obese women. The complication rates and outcomes for obese women were similar to those for non-obese women.

Dimensions

Altmetric

PlumX Metrics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citations

How to Cite

Thubert, T., Dabi, Y., Boudy, A. S., Joubert, M., Vaessen, C., Chartier-Kastler, E., Lefranc, J.-P., & Rouprêt, M. (2017). Comparison of functional outcomes after robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in women with a BMI below and above 30. Urogynaecologia, 30(1). https://doi.org/10.4081/uij.2017.178