Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Systematic review reveals lower failure and retreatment with sacrocolpopexy compared to native tissue repair in uterovaginal prolapse, suggesting greater durability.
Introduction and Hypothesis Sacrocolpopexy (SCP) is regarded as the gold-standard apical suspension procedure for vaginal vault prolapse; however, systematic reviews informing this reputation have largely included post-hysterectomy populations. Comparative evidence for primary uterovaginal prolapse (U-POP) remains limited. We aimed to evaluate failure and retreatment rates after hysterectomy with minimally invasive SCP compared with vaginal hysterectomy and native tissue repair (TVH + NTR). Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO CRD420251171050) as part of the 2026 U-POP Global Consensus Conference. MEDLINE and Embase were searched through October 31, 2025. Eligible studies included randomized trials and comparative cohort studies (≥ 30 participants) evaluating hysterectomy with minimally invasive SCP for primary U-POP, with or without a comparator group undergoing TVH + NTR. Outcomes included retreatment and failure. Pooled proportions of outcomes were estimated and between-group differences were evaluated using mixed-effects meta-regression. Study quality was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Results Of 5262 abstracts and 189 full texts screened, 24 studies met inclusion criteria: 6329 patients underwent hysterectomy with SCP and 681 underwent TVH + NTR. Compared with TVH + NTR, hysterectomy with SCP demonstrated significantly lower retreatment rates (1.59% vs 10.23%, p < 0.0001), subjective failure (5.09% vs 17.55%, p = 0.002), objective failure (6.80% vs 18.16%, p = 0.002), and composite failure (9.23% vs 18.19%, p = 0.005). Certainty of evidence was moderate to low. Conclusions For women undergoing surgery for U-POP, hysterectomy with minimally invasive SCP is associated with significantly lower failure and retreatment rates compared with TVH + NTR and thus may be preferred for patients at higher risk of recurrence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Huffman et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: