medrobМедицинская робототехникаMedical Robotics3033-63923033-8115MedINK10.63769/3033-6392-2026-1-1-26-34medrob-39Research ArticleПРОЛАПС ТАЗОВЫХ ОРГАНОВPELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSEДолгосрочные результаты коррекции апикального пролапса методом односторонней лигатурной пектопексии: клиническое исследованиеLong-term results of apical prolapse correction by unilateral pectineal suspension: a clinical trialhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-7172-5218БрукерК.В.М.BruckerC.V.M.

Козима Вероника Мария Брукер

90419 Нюрнберг, ул. Профессора Эрнста Натана, 1 

Cosima Veronika Maria Brucker 

1 Prof.-Ernst-Nathan-Str., Nuremberg 90419 

cosima.brucker@klinikum-nuernberg.dehttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-4935-2328БоловисД.И.BolovisD. I.

90419 Нюрнберг, ул. Профессора Эрнста Натана, 1

Греция, 11526 Афины, просп. Месогейон, 107 

1 Prof.-Ernst-Nathan-Str., Nuremberg 90419 

107 Mesogeion Ave, Athens 11526, Greece 

ШрайбмайерМ.SchreibmayerM.

9300 Санкт-Файт-ан-дер-Глан, ул. Шпиталгассе, 26 

5020 Зальцбург, ул. Штрубергассе, 21 

26 Spitalgasse, St. Veit/Glan 9300 

21 Strubergasse, Salzburg 5020 

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7696-1479ХитцльВ.HitzlW.

5020 Зальцбург, ул. Штрубергассе, 21 

21 Strubergasse, Salzburg 5020 

Отделение акушерства и гинекологии, Университетская женская больница Медицинского университета им. Парацельса на базе Клиникум НюрнбергГерманияDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Women’s Hospital, Paracelsus Medical University, Klinikum NurembergGermanyОтделение акушерства и гинекологии, Университетская женская больница Медицинского университета им. Парацельса на базе Клиникум Нюрнберг ; Госпиталь им. Анри ДюнанаГерманияDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Women’s Hospital, Paracelsus Medical University, Klinikum Nuremberg ; Henry Dunant HospitalGermanyБольница милосердных братьев ; Медицинский университет им. ПарацельсаАвстрияBarmherzige Brüder Krankenhaus ; Paracelsus Medical UniversityAustriaМедицинский университет им. ПарацельсаАвстрияParacelsus Medical UniversityAustria202619042026112634Copyright © Брукер К., Боловис Д.I., Шрайбмайер М., Хитцль В., 20262026Брукер К., Боловис Д., Шрайбмайер М., Хитцль В.Brucker C., Bolovis D.I., Schreibmayer M., Hitzl W.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.medrobot-j.com/jour/article/view/39Введение

Введение. Односторонняя лигатурная пектопексия (ОЛП) – это новый метод коррекции апикального пролапса без использования сетчатых имплантатов. Краткосрочные результаты изолированной ОЛП через 6 мес наблюдения оказались очень обнадеживающими: отмечена отличная стабильность апекса и высокая удовлетворенность пациенток с преимущественно тяжелым пролапсом (n = 47).

Цель настоящего исследования – оценить стабильность апекса влагалища и частоту остаточных дефектов, требующих повторного вмешательства, через 24 мес после изолированной ОЛП.

Материалы и методы

Материалы и методы. Для оценки долгосрочных результатов изолированной ОЛП всем 47 пациенткам из исходной когорты было предложено пройти плановое контрольное обследование минимум через 24 мес после операции. Мы проанализировали результаты с точки зрения стабильности апекса, частоты остаточных дефектов и связанных с операцией болей.

Результаты

Результаты. Выявлена высокая стабильность апекса через 24 мес после изолированной ОЛП. В течение периода наблюдения только 2 (4,3 %) пациенткам потребовалась повторная операция по поводу рецидива апикального пролапса. Увеличение возраста статистически значимо коррелировало с вероятностью рецидива. У 6 (13,0 %) пациенток появились симптомы в переднем и/или заднем отделе, в то время как апекс оставался стабильным. С возрастом вероятность повторной операции также увеличивалась, но статистически не значимо. Болевого синдрома, связанного с применением метода, не наблюдалось.

Заключение

Заключение. Двухлетнее наблюдение после изолированной ОЛП свидетельствует о стабильности результатов в области апекса. Комбинированный подход может быть полезен для снижения потенциальной необходимости дополнительной операции в переднем/заднем отделах.

Introduction

Introduction. Unilateral pectineal suspension (UPS) is a novel method for mesh-free apical prolapse correction. Short-term follow-up results 6 months after isolated UPS have been very encouraging, resulting in excellent apex stability and high patient satisfaction in a cohort of 47 patients with mostly advanced prolapse.

Aim

Aim. To evaluate the apex stability and the frequency of residual defects requiring secondary surgery 24 months after isolated UPS.

Materials and methods

Materials and methods. In order to assess the long-term outcome after isolated UPS, all 47 patients from the original patient cohort treated with isolated UPS were invited for a scheduled follow-up examination after a minimum follow-up period of two years to determine whether the result of the primary surgery remained stable. We analyzed the outcome with regard to apex stability, residual defects, and procedure-related morbidity.

Results

Results. UPS as a stand-alone procedure showed high stability at the apex. Throughout the two-year follow-up period, only 2 (4.3 %) patients required secondary surgery for apical recurrence. Increasing age correlated significantly with apical recurrence. Six (13.0 %) patients became symptomatic in the anterior and/or the posterior compartment while the apex remained stable. With increasing age, the probability of secondary surgery also appeared to rise, however, this was not statistically significant. There was no method-related morbidity.

Conclusion

Conclusion. Two-year follow-up after isolated UPS shows stable results at the apex. A combined approach may be valuable to reduce the potential necessity of secondary surgery in the anterior/posterior compartment.

пролапс тазовых органоводносторонняя лигатурная пектопексияроботизированная хирургияpelvic organ prolapseunilateral pectineal suspensionrobotic surgeryАвторы получили финансирование от Фонда Иоганна и Марии Кюнаст для покрытия расходов на написание статьи.The authors received funding from the Johann and Maria Künast Foundation to cover article processing charges.ReferencesBarber M.D., Maher C. Epidemiology and outcome assessment of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 2013;24(11):1783–90. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­013­2169­9Barber M.D., Maher C. Epidemiology and outcome assessment of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 2013;24(11):1783–90. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­013­2169­9Bradley C.S., Zimmerman M.B., Wang Q., Nygaard I.E. Vaginal descent and pelvic floor symptoms in postmenopausal women. Obstet Gynecol 2008;111(5):1148–53. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31816a3b96Bradley C.S., Zimmerman M.B., Wang Q., Nygaard I.E. Vaginal descent and pelvic floor symptoms in postmenopausal women. Obstet Gynecol 2008;111(5):1148–53. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31816a3b96Ten Slieker­Hove M.C.P., Pool­Goudzwaard A.L., Eijkemans M.J.C. et al. Prediction model and prognostic index to estimate clinically relevant pelvic organ prolapse in a general female population. Int Urogynecol J 2009;20(9):1013–21. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­009­0903­0Ten Slieker­Hove M.C.P., Pool­Goudzwaard A.L., Eijkemans M.J.C. et al. Prediction model and prognostic index to estimate clinically relevant pelvic organ prolapse in a general female population. Int Urogynecol J 2009;20(9):1013–21. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­009­0903­0Ugurlucan F.G., Evruke I., Yasa C. et al. Sexual functions and quality of life of women over 50 years with urinary incontinence, lower urinary tract symptoms and/or pelvic organ prolapse. Int J Impot Res 2020;32(5):535–43. DOI: 10.1038/s41443­019­0219­7Ugurlucan F.G., Evruke I., Yasa C. et al. Sexual functions and quality of life of women over 50 years with urinary incontinence, lower urinary tract symptoms and/or pelvic organ prolapse. Int J Impot Res 2020;32(5):535–43. DOI: 10.1038/s41443­019­0219­7Olsen A., Smith V., Bergstrom J. et al. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 1997;89(4):501–6. DOI: 10.1016/S0029­7844(97)00058­6Olsen A., Smith V., Bergstrom J. et al. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 1997;89(4):501–6. DOI: 10.1016/S0029­7844(97)00058­6Choi K.H., Hong J.Y. Management of pelvic organ prolapse. Korean J Urol 2014;55(11):693–702. DOI: 10.4111/kju.2014.55.11.693Choi K.H., Hong J.Y. Management of pelvic organ prolapse. Korean J Urol 2014;55(11):693–702. DOI: 10.4111/kju.2014.55.11.693Baessler K., Schuessler B. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy and anatomy and function of the posterior compartment. Obstet Gynecol 2001;97(5 Pt 1):678–84. DOI: 10.1016/s0029­7844(00)01205­9Baessler K., Schuessler B. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy and anatomy and function of the posterior compartment. Obstet Gynecol 2001;97(5 Pt 1):678–84. DOI: 10.1016/s0029­7844(00)01205­9Culligan P.J., Murphy M., Blackwell L. et al. Long­term success of abdominal sacral colpopexy using synthetic mesh. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;187(6):1473–82. DOI: 10.1067/mob.2002.129160Culligan P.J., Murphy M., Blackwell L. et al. Long­term success of abdominal sacral colpopexy using synthetic mesh. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;187(6):1473–82. DOI: 10.1067/mob.2002.129160Vandendriessche D., Sussfeld J., Giraudet G. et al. Complications and reoperations after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with a mean follow­up of 4 years. Int Urogynecol J 2017;28(2):231–9. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­016­3093­6Vandendriessche D., Sussfeld J., Giraudet G. et al. Complications and reoperations after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with a mean follow­up of 4 years. Int Urogynecol J 2017;28(2):231–9. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­016­3093­6Dandolu V., Akiyam M., Allenback G., Pathak P. Mesh complications and failure rates after transvaginal mesh repair compared with abdominal or laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and to native tissue repair in treating apical prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 2017;28(2):215–22. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­016­3108­3Dandolu V., Akiyam M., Allenback G., Pathak P. Mesh complications and failure rates after transvaginal mesh repair compared with abdominal or laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and to native tissue repair in treating apical prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 2017;28(2):215–22. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­016­3108­3Duong V., Schatzman­Bone S., Shi J. et al. Retrospective cohort study of mesh­related complications of minimally invasive sacrocervicopexy in 603 cases. Int Urogynecol J 2025;36(8):1671–7. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­025­06194­yDuong V., Schatzman­Bone S., Shi J. et al. Retrospective cohort study of mesh­related complications of minimally invasive sacrocervicopexy in 603 cases. Int Urogynecol J 2025;36(8):1671–7. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­025­06194­yShiozawa T., Huebner M., Hirt B. et al. Nerve­preserving sacrocolpopexy: anatomical study and surgical approach. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2010;152(1):103–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2010.05.009Shiozawa T., Huebner M., Hirt B. et al. Nerve­preserving sacrocolpopexy: anatomical study and surgical approach. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2010;152(1):103–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2010.05.009Dubuisson J.B., Eperon I., Jacob S. et al. Laparoscopic repair of pelvic organ prolapse by lateral suspension with mesh: a continuous series of 218 patients. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2011;39(3):127–31. DOI: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2010.12.007Dubuisson J.B., Eperon I., Jacob S. et al. Laparoscopic repair of pelvic organ prolapse by lateral suspension with mesh: a continuous series of 218 patients. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2011;39(3):127–31. DOI: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2010.12.007Banerjee C., Noé K.G. Laparoscopic pectopexy: a new technique of prolapse surgery for obese patients. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2011;284(3):631–5. DOI: 10.1007/s00404­010­1687­7Banerjee C., Noé K.G. Laparoscopic pectopexy: a new technique of prolapse surgery for obese patients. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2011;284(3):631–5. DOI: 10.1007/s00404­010­1687­7Bolovis D.I., Brucker C.V.M. Unilateral pectineal suspension – a new surgical approach for apical correction of pelvic organ prolapse. Facts Views Vis Obgyn 2022;14(2):177–81. DOI: 10.52054/FVVO.14.2.015Bolovis D.I., Brucker C.V.M. Unilateral pectineal suspension – a new surgical approach for apical correction of pelvic organ prolapse. Facts Views Vis Obgyn 2022;14(2):177–81. DOI: 10.52054/FVVO.14.2.015Bolovis D.I., Schreibmayer M., Hitzl W., Brucker C.V.M. Retrospective analysis of apical prolapse correction by unilateral pectineal suspension: perioperative and short­term results. Int Urogynecol J 2023;34(8):1877–84. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­023­05479­4Bolovis D.I., Schreibmayer M., Hitzl W., Brucker C.V.M. Retrospective analysis of apical prolapse correction by unilateral pectineal suspension: perioperative and short­term results. Int Urogynecol J 2023;34(8):1877–84. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­023­05479­4Bump R.C., Mattiasson A., Bø K. et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175(1):10–7. DOI: 10.1016/s0002­9378(96)70243­0Bump R.C., Mattiasson A., Bø K. et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175(1):10–7. DOI: 10.1016/s0002­9378(96)70243­0Persu C., Chapple C.R., Cauni V. et al. Pelvic organ prolapse quantification system (POP­Q) – a new era in pelvic prolapse staging. J Med Life 2011;4(1):75–81.Persu C., Chapple C.R., Cauni V. et al. Pelvic organ prolapse quantification system (POP­Q) – a new era in pelvic prolapse staging. J Med Life 2011;4(1):75–81.Haylen B.T., Maher C.F., Barber M.D. et al. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) / International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Int Urogynecol J 2016;27(2):165–94. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­015­2932­1Haylen B.T., Maher C.F., Barber M.D. et al. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) / International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Int Urogynecol J 2016;27(2):165–94. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­015­2932­1Schreibmayer M., Bolovis D.I., Brucker C.V.M. Apical prolapse correction by unilateral pectineal suspension. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2024;309(1):315–6. DOI: 10.1007/s00404­023­07067­9Schreibmayer M., Bolovis D.I., Brucker C.V.M. Apical prolapse correction by unilateral pectineal suspension. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2024;309(1):315–6. DOI: 10.1007/s00404­023­07067­9Bolovis D.I., Brucker C.V.M. Scar formation after unilateral pectineal suspension. Austin Gynecol Case Rep 2023;8(2):1044.Bolovis D.I., Brucker C.V.M. Scar formation after unilateral pectineal suspension. Austin Gynecol Case Rep 2023;8(2):1044.Abdullah B., Nomura J., Moriyama S. et al. Clinical and urodynamic assessment in patients with pelvic organ prolapse before and after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J 2017;28(10):1543–9. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­017­3306­7Abdullah B., Nomura J., Moriyama S. et al. Clinical and urodynamic assessment in patients with pelvic organ prolapse before and after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J 2017;28(10):1543–9. DOI: 10.1007/s00192­017­3306­7Brubaker L., Nygaard I., Richter H.E. et al. Two­year outcomes after sacrocolpopexy with and without burch to prevent stress urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 2008;112(1):49–55. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181778d2aBrubaker L., Nygaard I., Richter H.E. et al. Two­year outcomes after sacrocolpopexy with and without burch to prevent stress urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 2008;112(1):49–55. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181778d2aNygaard I.E., McCreer R., Brubaker L. et al. Pelvic floor disorders network abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol 2004;104(4):805–23. DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000139514.90897.0Nygaard I.E., McCreer R., Brubaker L. et al. Pelvic floor disorders network abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol 2004;104(4):805–23. DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000139514.90897.0Nygaard I., Brubaker L., Zyczynski H.M. et al. Long­term outcomes following abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. JAMA 2013;309(19):2016–24. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.4919Nygaard I., Brubaker L., Zyczynski H.M. et al. Long­term outcomes following abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. JAMA 2013;309(19):2016–24. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.4919Brucker C.M.V., Bolovis D.I. Re­evaluation of sacrocolpopexy as a gold standard for apical genital prolapse correction. Gyne Obstet Open A Open J 2021;3(1):48–53. DOI: 10.33169/gyne.Obste.GAOOAOJ­3­112Brucker C.M.V., Bolovis D.I. Re­evaluation of sacrocolpopexy as a gold standard for apical genital prolapse correction. Gyne Obstet Open A Open J 2021;3(1):48–53. DOI: 10.33169/gyne.Obste.GAOOAOJ­3­112Wallace S.L., Gee A.D., Das D. Multicompartment pelvic floor prolapse: advances in diagnosis and surgical management. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2025;37(6):416–20. DOI: 10.1097/GCO.0000000000001069Wallace S.L., Gee A.D., Das D. Multicompartment pelvic floor prolapse: advances in diagnosis and surgical management. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2025;37(6):416–20. DOI: 10.1097/GCO.0000000000001069Bolovis D.I., Brucker C.V.M. Total pelvic floor lifting: a new approach for the anatomic repair of pelvic floor hypermobility and vaginal laxity in parous women. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2024;12(2):e5584. DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000005584Bolovis D.I., Brucker C.V.M. Total pelvic floor lifting: a new approach for the anatomic repair of pelvic floor hypermobility and vaginal laxity in parous women. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2024;12(2):e5584. DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000005584

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.