Please wait a minute...
Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology  2020, Vol. 47 Issue (3): 355-358    DOI: 10.31083/j.ceog.2020.03.5284
Original Research Previous articles | Next articles
Short term outcomes of a new non-dissection minimally invasive surgery method for cystocele repair
G. Calongos1, *(), Y. Tsuji1, Y. Ito1, M. Handa1, Y. Kubota1, A. Ida1
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kobe Adventist Hospital, Arinodai, Kita-ku, Kobe, Japan
Download:  PDF(456KB)  ( 213 ) Full text   ( 8 )
Export:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      

Purpose of investigation: The objective of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of our new surgical technique for cystocele treatment. Materials and Methods: Twenty patients diagnosed from May 2017 to October 2018 with a minimum stage III cystocele were included. Our new technique was performed bilaterally using two polypropylene monofilament suture threads. The suture started at the level of the left bulbo cavernosus muscle and continued to the right and then to the left uterosacral ligament. With the second thread, the suture was made on the opposite side to that described above. Patients were followed-up for a minimum of six months post-operatively (mean 9.9 months). Results: No intra-surgical or post-surgical complications were observed. Only one patient presented with a cystocele recurrence during follow-up, but did not require treatment. Conclusion: The new surgical technique was found to be safe and effective for cystocele repair in this study.

Key words:  Cystocele      Pelvic organ prolapse (POP)      Vaginal surgery     
Submitted:  04 June 2019      Accepted:  02 September 2019      Published:  15 June 2020     
*Corresponding Author(s):  GIANNINA CALONGOS     E-mail:

Cite this article: 

G. Calongos, Y. Tsuji, Y. Ito, M. Handa, Y. Kubota, A. Ida. Short term outcomes of a new non-dissection minimally invasive surgery method for cystocele repair. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 47(3): 355-358.

URL:     OR

Figure 1.  — Schematic representation of the new type of suture for repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

Figure 2.  — Schematic representation of the new surgical technique. An anchor-like suture was started at the left bulbo cavernosus muscle (BCM) level (A). A new type of suture was then performed from that point to the right uterosacral ligament (USL) (B). Using the second needle, the same suture was performed in the same direction (C). A different set of suture thread was then used to perform the suture from the opposite side as described above (D). The same suture was then continued from the left to right and from the right to left USL (E). Both ends were pulled to return the bladder to its normal anatomical position (F).

Table 1  — Preoperative clinical characteristics of the patients
Characteristics Value
Age (years) 72.3 ± 7.8
Body weight (kg) 56.5 ± 7.4
Body mass index (kg/m2) 24.5 ± 3.0
Parity 2.3 ± 0.9
Previous pelvic organ prolapse surgery 6 (30)
Table 2  — Postoperative outcomes and complications of the patients
Characteristics Value
Fever 0
Hematoma formation 0
Abscess formation 0
Post-operative pelvic pain 0
Recurrence 1 (5)
[1] Choi K.H., Hong J.Y.: “Management of pelvic organ prolapse”. Korean J. Urol., 2014, 55, 693.
doi: 10.4111/kju.2014.55.11.693 pmid: 25405010
[2] Hendrix S.L., Clark A., Nygaard I., Aragaki A., Barnabei V., McTiernan A.: “Pelvic organ prolapse is the Women’s Health Initiative: gravity and gravidity”. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 2002, 186, 1160.
doi: 10.1067/mob.2002.123819 pmid: 12066091
[3] Maher C., Feiner B., Baessler K., Christmann-Schmid C., Haya N., Brown J.: “Surgery for women with anterior compartment prolapse”. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev., 2016, 11, CD004014.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004014.pub6 pmid: 27901278
[4] Houman J., Weinberger J.M., Eilber K.S.: “Native tissue repair for pelvic organ prolapse”. Curr. Urol. Rep., 2017, 18, 6.
doi: 10.1007/s11934-017-0648-0 pmid: 28155202
[5] Barber M.D., Maher C.: “Epidemiology and outcome assessment of pelvic organ prolapse”. Int. Urogynecol. J., 2013, 24, 1783.
doi: 10.1007/s00192-013-2169-9
[6] Song H., Choo G.Y., Jin L., Yoon S., Lee T.: “Transvaginal cystocele repair by purse-string technique reinforced with three simple sutures: surgical technique and results”. Int. Neurourol. J., 2012, 16, 144.
doi: 10.5213/inj.2012.16.3.144 pmid: 23094221
[7] Lucot J.P., Cosson M., Bader G., Debodinance P., Akladios C., SaletLizee D, et al.: “Safety of vaginal mesh surgery versus laparoscopic mesh sacropexy for cystocele repair: results of the prosthetic pelvic floor repair randomized controlled trial”. Eur. Urol., 2018, 74, 167.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.01.044 pmid: 29472143
[8] U.S. Food and Drug administration: “FDA Safety Communiciation UPDATE on serious complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse”. Available at:
[9] Bureau M., Carlson K.V.: “Pelvic organ prolapse: a primer for urologists”. Can. Urol. Assoc. J., 2017, 11, S125.
doi: 10.5489/cuaj.4634 pmid: 28616110
[10] Papa Petros P.E.: “The female pelvic floor: function, dysfunction and management according to the integral theory”. Berlin: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2004.
[11] Geynisman-Tan J., Kenton K.: “Surgical updates in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse”. Rambam Maimonides Med. J., 2017, 8, e0017.
doi: 10.5041/RMMJ.20769172
[12] Weintraub A.Y., Zvi M.B., Yohay D., Neymeyer J., Reuven Y., Neuman M., Tsivian A.: “Safety and short term outcomes of a new truly minimally-invsive mesh-less and dissection-less anchoring system for pelvic organ prolapse apical repair”. Int. Braz. J. Urol., 2017, 43, 533.
doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2016.0356 pmid: 28191790
[1] H.H. Chill, R.H. Yahya, M. Olek, S. Herzberg, S. Lesser, D. Shveiky. Anatomical outcome and patient satisfaction after two-stitch utero-sacral ligament suspension[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2019, 46(6): 906-909.
No Suggested Reading articles found!