Title

Laparoscopic versus open Burch retropubic urethropexy: comparison of morbidity and costs when performed with concurrent vaginal prolapse repairs

UMMS Affiliation

Meyers Primary Care Institute; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Date

4-23-2002

Document Type

Article

Medical Subject Headings

Aged; Cohort Studies; Female; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures; *Health Care Costs; Humans; Hysterectomy; *Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Middle Aged; *Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Urethra; Urinary Incontinence, Stress; Urologic Surgical Procedures; Uterine Prolapse

Disciplines

Health Services Research | Primary Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the morbidity and cost that are associated with laparoscopic and open Burch retropubic urethropexy when they are performed with concurrent vaginal prolapse repairs.

STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective study of all patients who had undergone laparoscopic (n = 76) or open (n = 143) Burch retropubic urethropexy with at least 1 concurrent vaginal repair for symptomatic prolapse. We compared demographic data, level of prolapse, operative and postoperative details, medical and surgical histories, complications, and hospital charges.

RESULTS: The group with open retropubic urethropexy had an older age, greater degree of prolapse, fewer concurrent hysterectomies, and a greater number of vaginal procedures than the group with laparoscopic retropubic urethropexy. There were minimal differences in complications and no differences in the estimated blood loss, operative time, hemoglobin change, hospitalization, or hospital charges between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION: Traditional benefits of laparoscopic retropubic urethropexy were not apparent when vaginal prolapse repairs were performed.

Rights and Permissions

Citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Apr;186(4):723-8.

Comments

At the time of publication, Abraham Morse was not yet affiliated with the University of Massachusetts Medical School.

Related Resources

Link to Article in PubMed

PubMed ID

11967498