{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,22]],"date-time":"2026-04-22T02:45:35Z","timestamp":1776825935856,"version":"3.51.2"},"reference-count":32,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,3,13]],"date-time":"2024-03-13T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1710288000000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,3,13]],"date-time":"2024-03-13T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1710288000000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["BMC Women's Health"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Pelvic organ prolapse is a debilitating condition impacting lives of millions of women worldwide. Sacrocolpopexy (SCP) is considered an effective and durable surgical technique for treatment of apical prolapse. The aim of this study was to compare short-term outcomes including postoperative complications and unanticipated healthcare encounters between patients who underwent SCP with a mini-laparotomy approach compared to patients treated with laparoscopic and robotic-assisted laparoscopic SCP.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>This was a retrospective cohort study including patients treated for apical prolapse at a university affiliated urogynecology practice. Patients over the age of 18 who underwent abdominal SCP between 2019 and 2023 were included. The cohort was formed into two groups: (1) Patients who underwent SCP through a mini-laparotomy incision (Mini-lap group); (2) Patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic-assisted laparoscopic SCP (Lap\/Robot group).<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>A total of 116 patients were included in the final analysis. Ninety patients underwent either laparoscopic or robotic-assisted SCP, whereas 26 patients underwent SCP with a mini-laparotomy approach. Study participants exhibited a mean age of 63.1\u2009\u00b1\u200910.3 years, mean body mass index (BMI) of 25.8\u2009\u00b1\u20094.9 Kg\/m<jats:sup>2<\/jats:sup>, and 77.6% of them identified as Caucasian. Upon comparison of demographic and past medical history between groups there were no statistically significant differences in age, BMI, menopausal status, race, parity or comorbid conditions. Patients in the Mini-lap group were less likely to have undergone previous abdominal surgery (11.5% vs. 50.6%, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009&lt;\u20090.001) and had more severe apical prolapse (stage 4 prolapse, 40% vs. 21.2%, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009&lt;\u20090.001) than their counterparts in the Lap\/robot group. Regarding intraoperative parameters, length of surgery was significantly shorter in the Mini-lap group compared to the Lap\/robot group (97.3\u2009\u00b1\u200935.0\u00a0min vs. 242.0\u2009\u00b1\u200952.6\u00a0min, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009&lt;\u20090.001). When focusing on the primary outcome, postoperative complications within the first 30 days after surgery, there were no differences noted between groups. Additionally, the number of unanticipated healthcare encounters, such as phone calls, clinic visits, emergency department visits, urgent care visits, readmissions and reoperations were similar between groups.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Mini-laparotomy approach for SCP is safe with comparable intra- and postoperative complications, and unanticipated healthcare encounters compared to conventional minimally invasive methods.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1186\/s12905-024-03011-4","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,3,13]],"date-time":"2024-03-13T08:55:42Z","timestamp":1710320142000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":6,"title":["Postoperative complications and unanticipated healthcare encounters following mini-laparotomy vs. laparoscopic\/robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: a comparative retrospective study"],"prefix":"10.1186","volume":"24","author":[{"given":"Henry H.","family":"Chill","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Alireza","family":"Hadizadeh","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Claudia","family":"Paya-Ten","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Angela","family":"Leffelman","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Cecilia","family":"Chang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Nani P.","family":"Moss","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Roger P.","family":"Goldberg","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,3,13]]},"reference":[{"issue":"2","key":"3011_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"137","DOI":"10.1002\/nau.22922","volume":"35","author":"BT Haylen","year":"2016","unstructured":"Haylen BT, Maher CF, Barber MD, Camargo S, Dandolu V, Digesu A, Goldman HB, Huser M, Milani AL, Moran PA. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)\/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35(2):137\u201368.","journal-title":"Neurourol Urodyn"},{"key":"3011_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1783","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-013-2169-9","volume":"24","author":"MD Barber","year":"2013","unstructured":"Barber MD, Maher C. Epidemiology and outcome assessment of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24:1783\u201390.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"6","key":"3011_CR3","first-page":"397","volume":"25","author":"Obstetricians","year":"2019","unstructured":"Obstetricians, ACo. Gynecologists: pelvic organ prolapse. Urogynecology. 2019;25(6):397\u2013408.","journal-title":"Urogynecology"},{"key":"3011_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"15","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-019-04066-w","volume":"31","author":"Y Gao","year":"2020","unstructured":"Gao Y, Zhao Z, Yang Y, Zhang M, Wu J, Miao Y. Diagnostic value of pelvic floor ultrasonography for diagnosis of pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31:15\u201333.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"9","key":"3011_CR5","first-page":"1111","volume":"81","author":"I Kuncharapu","year":"2010","unstructured":"Kuncharapu I, Majeroni BA, Johnson DW. Pelvic organ prolapse. Am Family Phys. 2010;81(9):1111\u20137.","journal-title":"Am Family Phys"},{"key":"3011_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Madhu C, Swift S, Moloney-Geany S, Drake MJ. How to use the pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP\u2010Q) system? Neurourology and urodynamics. 2018, 37(S6):S39-S43.","DOI":"10.1002\/nau.23740"},{"issue":"1","key":"3011_CR7","first-page":"75","volume":"4","author":"C Persu","year":"2011","unstructured":"Persu C, Chapple C, Cauni V, Gutue S, Geavlete P. Pelvic organ prolapse quantification system (POP\u2013Q)\u2013a new era in pelvic prolapse staging. J Med Life. 2011;4(1):75.","journal-title":"J Med Life"},{"issue":"3","key":"3011_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"615","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000175832.13266.bb","volume":"106","author":"AM Weber","year":"2005","unstructured":"Weber AM, Richter HE. Pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106(3):615\u201334.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"1","key":"3011_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"44","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000000570","volume":"125","author":"NY Siddiqui","year":"2015","unstructured":"Siddiqui NY, Grimes CL, Casiano ER, Abed HT, Jeppson PC, Olivera CK, Sanses TV, Steinberg AC, South MM, Balk EM. Mesh sacrocolpopexy compared with native tissue vaginal repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(1):44\u201355.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"5","key":"3011_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"430","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1479-828X.2005.00459.x","volume":"45","author":"P Higgs","year":"2005","unstructured":"Higgs P, Goh J, Krause H, Sloane K, Carey M. Abdominal sacral colpopexy: an independent prospective long-term follow-up study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2005;45(5):430\u20134.","journal-title":"Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol"},{"issue":"4","key":"3011_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"805","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000139514.90897.07","volume":"104","author":"IE Nygaard","year":"2004","unstructured":"Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, Connolly A, Cundiff G, Weber AM, Zyczynski H, Network PFD. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a Comprehensive Review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(4):805\u201323.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"12","key":"3011_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"90","DOI":"10.1007\/s11934-016-0643-x","volume":"17","author":"EB Takacs","year":"2016","unstructured":"Takacs EB, Kreder KJ. Sacrocolpopexy: Surgical technique, outcomes, and complications. Curr Urol Rep. 2016;17(12):90.","journal-title":"Curr Urol Rep"},{"issue":"10","key":"3011_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1469","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-017-3296-5","volume":"28","author":"AWM Coolen","year":"2017","unstructured":"Coolen AWM, van Oudheusden AMJ, Mol BWJ, van Eijndhoven HWF, Roovers JWR, Bongers MY. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy compared with open abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vault prolapse repair: a randomised controlled trial. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28(10):1469\u201379.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"1","key":"3011_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"15","DOI":"10.1111\/ases.12478","volume":"11","author":"M Ichikawa","year":"2018","unstructured":"Ichikawa M, Kaseki H, Akira S. Laparoscopic versus abdominal sacrocolpopexy for treatment of multi-compartmental pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review. Asian J Endosc Surg. 2018;11(1):15\u201322.","journal-title":"Asian J Endosc Surg"},{"issue":"5","key":"3011_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"785","DOI":"10.1007\/s11701-020-01177-1","volume":"15","author":"M Lallemant","year":"2021","unstructured":"Lallemant M, Tresch C, Puyraveau M, Delplanque S, Cosson M, Ramanah R. Evaluating the morbidity and long-term efficacy of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with and without robotic assistance for pelvic organ prolapse. J Robotic Surg. 2021;15(5):785\u201392.","journal-title":"J Robotic Surg"},{"issue":"6","key":"3011_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"449","DOI":"10.21037\/atm-20-4347","volume":"9","author":"J Yang","year":"2021","unstructured":"Yang J, He Y, Zhang X, Wang Z, Zuo X, Gao L, Hong L. Robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Transl Med. 2021;9(6):449.","journal-title":"Ann Transl Med"},{"issue":"9","key":"3011_CR17","first-page":"551","volume":"42","author":"D Hidlebaugh","year":"1997","unstructured":"Hidlebaugh D, Vulgaropulos S, Orr RK. Treating adnexal masses. Operative laparoscopy vs. laparotomy. J Reprod Med. 1997;42(9):551\u20138.","journal-title":"J Reprod Med"},{"key":"3011_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Tsiampa E, Tsiampas K, Kapogiannis F. Perioperative and reproductive outcomes\u2019 comparison of mini-laparotomy and laparoscopic myomectomy in the management of uterine leiomyomas: a systematic review. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2023.","DOI":"10.1007\/s00404-023-07168-5"},{"key":"3011_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"215","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-016-3108-3","volume":"28","author":"V Dandolu","year":"2017","unstructured":"Dandolu V, Akiyama M, Allenback G, Pathak P. Mesh complications and failure rates after transvaginal mesh repair compared with abdominal or laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and to native tissue repair in treating apical prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28:215\u201322.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"6","key":"3011_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"470","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmig.2005.07.002","volume":"12","author":"F Fanfani","year":"2005","unstructured":"Fanfani F, Fagotti A, Bifulco G, Ercoli A, Malzoni M, Scambia G. A prospective study of laparoscopy versus minilaparotomy in the treatment of uterine myomas. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2005;12(6):470\u20134.","journal-title":"J Minim Invasive Gynecol"},{"issue":"2","key":"3011_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"232","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2004.07.040","volume":"119","author":"F Fanfani","year":"2005","unstructured":"Fanfani F, Fagotti A, Longo R, Marana E, Mancuso S, Scambia G. Minilaparotomy in the management of benign gynecologic disease. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reproductive Biology. 2005;119(2):232\u20136.","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reproductive Biology"},{"issue":"1","key":"3011_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"103","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2004.12.025","volume":"193","author":"MD Barber","year":"2005","unstructured":"Barber MD, Walters MD, Bump RC. Short forms of two condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(1):103\u201313.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"1","key":"3011_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"10","DOI":"10.1016\/S0002-9378(96)70243-0","volume":"175","author":"RC Bump","year":"1996","unstructured":"Bump RC, Mattiasson A, B\u00f8 K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, Shull BL, Smith AR. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(1):10\u20137.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"3011_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"94","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2019.12.029","volume":"245","author":"O Gluck","year":"2020","unstructured":"Gluck O, Blaganje M, Veit-Rubin N, Phillips C, Deprest J, O\u2019reilly B, But I, Moore R, Jeffery S, Haddad JM. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive literature review on current practice. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reproductive Biology. 2020;245:94\u2013101.","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reproductive Biology"},{"key":"3011_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1155\/2020\/7367403","volume":"2020","author":"H Kanasaki","year":"2020","unstructured":"Kanasaki H, Oride A, Hara T, Kyo S. Comparative retrospective study of tension-free vaginal mesh surgery, native tissue repair, and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse repair. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2020;2020:1\u20136.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol Int"},{"key":"3011_CR26","unstructured":"Chang C-L, Chen C-H, Chang S-J. Comparing the outcomes and effectiveness of robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 2022:1\u201312."},{"issue":"4","key":"3011_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"493","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmig.2010.03.011","volume":"17","author":"JP Judd","year":"2010","unstructured":"Judd JP, Siddiqui NY, Barnett JC, Visco AG, Havrilesky LJ, Wu JM. Cost-minimization analysis of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal sacrocolpopexy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010;17(4):493\u20139.","journal-title":"J Minim Invasive Gynecol"},{"issue":"1","key":"3011_CR28","first-page":"44","volume":"17","author":"J Tan-Kim","year":"2011","unstructured":"Tan-Kim J, Menefee SA, Luber KM, Nager CW, Lukacz ES. Robotic-assisted and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: comparing operative times, costs and outcomes. Urogynecology. 2011;17(1):44\u20139.","journal-title":"Urogynecology"},{"issue":"1","key":"3011_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"65","DOI":"10.3109\/01443615.2013.828685","volume":"34","author":"N Sirisabya","year":"2014","unstructured":"Sirisabya N, Manchana T. Minilaparotomy vs laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign gynaecological diseases. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014;34(1):65\u20139.","journal-title":"J Obstet Gynaecol"},{"issue":"7","key":"3011_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2368","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2008.12.127","volume":"93","author":"M Malzoni","year":"2010","unstructured":"Malzoni M, Tinelli R, Cosentino F, Iuzzolino D, Surico D, Reich H. Laparoscopy versus minilaparotomy in women with symptomatic uterine myomas: short-term and fertility results. Fertil Steril. 2010;93(7):2368\u201373.","journal-title":"Fertil Steril"},{"issue":"1","key":"3011_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"5","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000000006","volume":"123","author":"JT Anger","year":"2014","unstructured":"Anger JT, Mueller ER, Tarnay C, Smith B, Stroupe K, Rosenman A, Brubaker L, Bresee C, Kenton K. Robotic compared with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(1):5\u201312.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"3011_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"115","DOI":"10.1007\/s10397-016-0930-z","volume":"13","author":"G Callewaert","year":"2016","unstructured":"Callewaert G, Bosteels J, Housmans S, Verguts J, Van Cleynenbreugel B, Van der Aa F, De Ridder D, Vergote I, Deprest J. Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review. Gynecol Surg. 2016;13:115\u201323.","journal-title":"Gynecol Surg"}],"container-title":["BMC Women's Health"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12905-024-03011-4.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1186\/s12905-024-03011-4\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s12905-024-03011-4.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,3,13]],"date-time":"2024-03-13T08:55:55Z","timestamp":1710320155000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/bmcwomenshealth.biomedcentral.com\/articles\/10.1186\/s12905-024-03011-4"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,3,13]]},"references-count":32,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,12]]}},"alternative-id":["3011"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12905-024-03011-4","relation":{},"ISSN":["1472-6874"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1472-6874","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2024,3,13]]},"assertion":[{"value":"20 December 2023","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"4 March 2024","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"13 March 2024","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"The study was approved by the institutional ethical review board of NorthShore University HealthSystem, IRB# EH22-132. All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations of the institutional ethical review board and in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The requirement for informed consent was waived by the Ethics Committee of NorthShore University HealthSystem because of the retrospective nature of the study.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethics approval and consent to participate"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Consent for publication"}},{"value":"The authors declare no competing interests.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Competing interests"}}],"article-number":"173"}}