#0603

Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: Functional and QoL Outcomes with up to 10 Years follow-up

J. Yong¹, V. Oze², S. Yeow³, V. Tse⁴

¹Singapore General Hospitasl, Urololgy, Singapore, Singapore
²Concord Repatriation General Hospital, Urology, Sydney, Australia
³Khoo Teck Puat Hospital, Urology, Singapore, Singapore
⁴Macquarie University Hospital, Urololgy, Sydney, Australia

Introduction:

To evaluate the long-term functional and quality of life (QoL) outcomes of mesh robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy (RASC) for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) with a minimum follow-up period of five years, and up to ten years.

Material and methods:

This retrospective study analysed prospectively collected data from 20 patients who underwent RASC for POP at a single centre from September 2014 to 2018. Inclusion criteria included a diagnosis of POP requiring surgical intervention, undergoing RASC performed by the same surgeon, and a minimum follow-up period of five years. Data collected included demographic variables, preoperative and postoperative functional evaluations using the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ), perioperative data, and Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scores. Statistical significance of preoperative and postoperative PFIQ scores was assessed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

Results:

The mean age of patients was 65 years. Forty percent (n=8) had undergone a previous hysterectomy, 25% (n=5) had a history of prior surgery for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), and 25% (n=5) experienced a recurrence of POP following previous transvaginal prolapse repair surgery. The average operative time was 142 minutes, with a mean estimated blood loss of 100 milliliters. No major complications were reported within 30 days post-surgery. Significant improvements were observed in PFIQ scores across all domains: ‘bladder or urine' symptom scores decreased from 19.04 to 4.05, ‘bowel or rectum' symptom scores from 25.50 to 4.99, and ‘vaginal or pelvic' symptom scores from 20.24 to 3.10 (p < 0.001 for all). 90% (n=18) of patients reported their symptoms as very much better, much better or a little better according to PGI-I scores.