Evidence Hub

Extraperitoneal laparoscopic colposuspension: short-term cure rate, complications, and duration of hospital stay in comparison with Burch colposuspension

Saidi MH, Gallagher MS, Skop IP, Saidi JA, Sadler RK, Diaz KC

Obstetrics and gynecology, 1998

87 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, complications, and short-term cure rate of extraperitoneal laparoscopic colposuspension with that of Burch colposuspension.

METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 157 consecutive cases of extraperitoneal laparoscopic (n=70) or Burch colposuspension (n=87) performed between January 1, 1995, and June 30, 1997. Cure rate was assessed by history, physical examination, and questionnaire. Patients not requiring the use of pads were considered continent. Cure rates were compared in the entire group, whereas complications, duration of surgery, and length of stay were compared only in subgroups undergoing colposuspension alone. Results were analyzed statistically.

RESULTS: The mean times to follow-up were 12.9 months (laparoscopic group) and 16.3 months (Burch group). At last follow-up, 64 of 70 (91.4%) of the laparoscopic and 80 of 87 (92%) of the Burch colposuspension group were continent. In patients who underwent colposuspension alone, results were as follows for those who underwent laparoscopic (19) and Burch (21) procedures, respectively: average duration of surgery, 49.2 compared with 62.6 minutes (P < .03); average hospital stay, 14 hours compared with 2.7 days (P < .001); average postoperative disability period, 1.6 weeks compared with 4.7 weeks (P < .001); incidence of complications, 15.8% compared with 33.3% (P=.170).

CONCLUSION: Extraperitoneal laparoscopic colposuspension, compared with Burch…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 87 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free