目的：探讨机器人辅助阴道骶骨固定术治疗重度盆腔器官脱垂的效果及安全性。方法：纳入 2021 年 1 月—2023 年 12 月在青岛大学附属医院妇科接受机器人辅助阴道骶骨固定术（RASC）治疗的 54 例重度盆腔器官脱 垂患者为研究对象。32 例（59.26%）患者因合并阴道后壁重度脱垂接受改良的机器人辅助下肛提肌筋膜 - 阴道骶骨 固定术，22 例（40.74%）患者行常规阴道骶骨固定术，其中有 5 例患者因合并 SUI 同时行 TVT-O 术。记录所有患 者的围术期相关资料，收集患者术后 1 个月、6 个月及 12 个月的随访数据。对比了患者术前、术后盆腔脏器脱垂的 治疗效果、安全性及可行性。采用盆底功能障碍问卷（PFDI-20）和盆底障碍影响简易问卷（PFIQ-7）评估患者术后 主观满意度，并采用 PISQ-12 问卷评价其性生活满意度。结果：所有手术均顺利完成，无中转开腹，未见大血管及 邻近器官损伤。平均手术时间（186.11±68.91）min，术中平均出血量（40.37±19.62）ml，平均术后住院时间（3.63±1.70）d。 所有患者均完成术后 12 个月随访，最长随访时间 22 个月。患者术后 6 个月、12 个月 POP-Q 评分均较术前有明显 的改善，无复发，术后客观及主观治愈率均为 100%。PFDI-20 及 PFIQ-7 调查结果显示，患者术后 6 个月及 12 个 月生活质量均得到显著改善（P<0.001）；术后 12 个月有 40 例患者恢复性生活，所有患者均未述性生活疼痛及不适， PISQ-12 评分在手术前后无显著差异。术后阴道残端感染 2 例（3.7%），持续阴道残端网片暴露 1 例（1.85%）， 于术后 1 年再次缝合后愈合。结论：达芬奇机器人手术系统治疗重度盆腔器官脱垂，尤其是合并重度阴道后壁脱垂 及肠疝疗效确切、出血量少、手术时间短，可作为该类疾病的有效治疗方案之一。

Objective: To explore the efficacy and safety of robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of severe pelvic organ prolapse. Methods: A total of 54 patients with severe pelvic organ prolapse who received robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy (RASC) in the Department of Gynecology, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University from January 2021 to December 2023 were included in the study. Among them, 32 patients (59.26%) underwent modified robotic levator ani muscle fascia-sacrocolpopexy for severe posterior vaginal prolapse, 22 patients (40.74%) underwent conventional sacrocolpopexy, and 5 patients underwent TVT-O for SUI. The perioperative and operative data of all patients were recorded, and the follow-up data at 1 month, 6 months and 12 months after surgery were collected to compare the treatment effect, safety and feasibility of POP. The pelvic floor Dysfunction Questionnaire (PFDI-20) and the Simple Pelvic Floor Dysfunction Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ- 7) were used to evaluate the subjective satisfaction after surgery, and the PISQ-12 was used to evaluate the sexual satisfaction. Results: All surgeries were successfully completed, no conversion to laparotomy, no damage to large blood vessels and adjacent organs. The mean intraoperative blood loss was (40.37±19.62) ml, the mean operative time was (186.11±68.91) min, and the mean postoperative hospital stay was (3.63±1.70) d. All 54 patients were followed up at 6 months and 12 months after surgery, and the longest follow-up was 22 months. POP-Q scores after surgery were significantly improved compared with those before surgery, and no patients recurred. The objective and subjective cure rates were 100%. PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 showed that the quality of life of patients was significantly improved at 6 and 12 months after operation. In 12 months after surgery, 40 patients resumed sexual activity, all patients did not report sexual pain and discomfort except one patient with mesh exposure, and there was no significant difference in PISQ-12 scores before and after surgery. Postoperative vaginal stump infection occurred in 2 cases (3.7%) and persistent vaginal stump mesh exposure in 1 case (1.85%), which healed after repair surgery. Conclusion: Robotic surgical system has technical advantages in the treatment of severe POP, especially in patients with severe posterior vaginal prolapse and intestinal hernia. RASC could be one of the promising surgical options for its safe and accurate effect.

收稿日期：2024-02-20  录用日期：2024-04-18 

Received Date: 2024-02-20  Accepted Date: 2024-04-18 

基金项目：青岛市市南区科技计划项目（2022-2-006-YY） 

Foundation Item: Science and Technology Plan Project of Shinan District of Qingdao City (2022-2-006-YY) 

通讯作者：娄艳辉，Email：lyh7497@163.com 

Corresponding Author: LOU Yanhui, Email; lyh7497@163.com 

引用格式：王丽杉，左丽，夏玉芳，等 . 机器人辅助阴道骶骨固定术治疗重度盆腔器官脱垂的疗效分析（附手术视频）[J]. 机器人 外科学杂志（中英文），2024，5（3）：420-425. 

Citation: WANG L S, ZOU L, XIA Y F, et al. Clinical analysis of robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for severe pelvic organ prolapse (with surgical video) [J]. Chinese Journal of Robotic Surgery, 2024, 5(3): 420-425.

[1] Harvey M A, Chih H J, Geoffrion R, et al. International Urogynecology Consultation Chapter 1 Committee 5; relationship of pelvic organ prolapse to associated pelvic floor dysfunction symptoms; lower urinary tract, bowel, sexual dysfunction and abdominopelvic pain[J]. Int Urogynecol J, 2021 32(10): 2575-2594. 

[2] Maher C, Yeung E, Haya N, et al. Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2023, 10(10): CD012376. 

[3] Parkes I L, Shveiky D. Sacrocolpopexy for treatment of vaginal apical prolapse; evidence-based surgery[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2014, 21(4): 546-557. 

[4] Giannini A, Russo E, Malacarne E, Cecchi E, et al. Role of robotic surgery on pelvic floor reconstruction[J]. Minerva Ginecol, 2019, 71(1): 4-17. 

[5] Collins S A, O’Shea M, Dykes N, Ramm O, et al. International Urogynecological Consultation; clinical definition of pelvic organ prolapse[J]. Int Urogynecol J, 2021, 32(8): 2011-2019. 

[6] 中华医学会妇产科学分会妇科盆底学组 . 盆腔器官 脱垂的中国诊治指南 (2020 年版 )[J]. 中华妇产科杂 志 , 2020, 55(5): 300-306. 

[7] 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[J]. Int Urogynecol J, 2022, 33(2): 297-308. 

[8] Karram M, Maher C. Surgery for posterior vaginal wall prolapse[J]. International Urogynecology Journal, 2013, 24(11): 1835-1841. 

[9] 牛珂 , 孟元光 , 范文生 , 等 . 机器人辅助腹腔镜下 阴道骶骨固定术用于盆腔器官脱垂治疗效果分析 [J]. 中国妇产科临床杂志 , 2021, 22(2): 116-118. 

[10] 张警方 , 纪妹 , 苑中甫 , 等 . 达芬奇机器人系统辅 助腹腔镜骶骨阴道固定术治疗盆腔器官脱垂的效 果 [J]. 河南医学研究 , 2020, 29(16): 2895-2899. 

[11] Illiano E, Ditonno P, Giannitsas K, et al. Robotassisted Vs laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for highstage pelvic organ prolapse; a prospective, randomized, single-center study[J]. Urology, 2019. DOI; 10.1016/ j.urology.2019.07.043. 

[12] Stabile G, Romano F, Topouzova G A, et al. Spondylodiscitis after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse; description of a rare complication and systematic review of the literature[J]. Front Surg, 2021, 29(8): 741311. 

[13] Correa J, Aribo C, Stuparich M, et al. Malfunction events in the US FDA MAUDE Database; how does robotic gynecologic surgery compare with other specialties? [J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2022, 29(2): 300-307.e1.