Management of apical compartment prolapse (uterine and vault prolapse): A FIGO Working Group report.
Apical prolapse includes descent of the uterus, vagina cuff, or rarely solely of the cervix. It is estimated that women have an 11-19% life-time risk of undergoing surgery for POP. This rate is projected to increase over the next 2-3 decades. In this FIGO working group report we address the conservative and surgical treatment options for apical prolapse.



The FIGO working group "Pelvic Floor Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery" describes the different treatments for apical prolapse based on the literature evidence, the cost-effectiveness, the degree of difficulty and summed them up with an experts recommendation.



Among the conservative treatment options, pessaries are the most successful options since centuries with a low complication rate and low costs. Among the vaginal operative procedures the sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) and the uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS) show comparable outcomes and efficacy with a different, however, rather low complication pattern and a favorable cost-benefit profile. Sacrocolpopexy, independent on the open abdominal, laparoscopic, or robotic-assisted laparoscopic technique has a good durability and quality of life performance. The minimal invasive techniques are as effective as the open abdominal techniques and there is no difference in mesh exposure.



Vaginal procedures are well described procedures with favorable outcomes and cost-benefit profiles. Sacral colpopexy has a high-effectivity; data on the route of performance and long-term outcome are awaited. The cost with mesh implants are higher compared to the operations with autologous tissue or any conservative treatment and further studies are recommended to evaluate the cure rates in the span of decades and the possible long-term mesh complications. Neurourol. Urodynam. 36:507-513, 2017. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Department of Gynecology, University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland.
Cornelia
C
Betschart
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy.
Mauro
M
Cervigni
Faculty of Medicine, University of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Oscar
O
Contreras Ortiz
Department of Gynecology, St. George's University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Stergios K
SK
Doumouchtsis
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka City Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Masayasu
M
Koyama
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Miami School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.
Carlos
C
Medina
Gynecology Division, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Jorge Milhem
JM
Haddad
Surgical Department, Policlinico "Umberto I", Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Filippo
F
la Torre
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital of Vicenza, Vicenza, Italy.
Giuliano
G
Zanni
D005260:Female; D013509:Gynecologic Surgical Procedures / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D010535:Laparoscopy / Q000379:methods; D056887:Pelvic Organ Prolapse / Q000601:surgery*; D010570:Pessaries; D011788:Quality of Life; D019651:Plastic Surgery Procedures / Q000379:methods*; D013526:Surgical Mesh
International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO); apical compartment; conservative treatment; pelvic organ prolapse (POP); surgery