Maher C, Yeung E, Haya N, et al. Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023;2023(7). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012376.pub2.

Silver Spring M. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA takes action to protect women’s health and orders manufacturers of surgical mesh in- tended for transvaginal repair of pelvic organ prolapse to stop selling all devices. 2019. https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm636114.htm.

Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(4):805–23. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000139514.90897.07.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Deblaere S, Hauspy J, Hansen K. Mesh exposure following minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: a narrative review. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33(10):2713–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-021-04998-2.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Kališ V, Rušavý Z, Ismail KM. Hysterectomy versus uterine preservation in the management of uterine prolapse. In: Phillips C, Jeffery S, O’Reilly B, Paraiso MFR, Deval B, editors. Laparoscopic urogynaecology: principles and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2022:175–186. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009128377.023.

Meriwether KV, Antosh DD, Olivera CK, et al. Uterine preservation vs hysterectomy in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis and clinical practice guidelines. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;219(2):129-146.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2018.01.018.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Veit-Rubin N, Dubuisson J, Constantin F, et al. Uterus preservation is superior to hysterectomy when performing laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh. Int Urogynecol J. 2019;30(4):557–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-018-3678-3.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Porcari I, Zorzato PC, Bosco M, et al. Clinician perspectives on hysterectomy versus uterine preservation in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Obstet. September 2023;2024:173–89. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.15343.

Article  Google Scholar 

Cardozo L, Rovner E, Wagg A, Wein A. Incontinence 7th edition 2023 7th International consultation on incontinence ICUD editors. vol 7; 2023. www.icud.info.

Daniels S, Robson D, Palacz M, Howell S, Nguyen T, Behnia-Willison F. Success rates and outcomes of laparoscopic mesh sacrohysteropexy. Aust New Zeal J Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;60(2):244–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13104.

Article  Google Scholar 

Samantray SR, Mohapatra I. Successful pregnancy outcome after laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy for pelvic organ prolapse. Cureus. 2021;13(2):1–6. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.13087.

Article  Google Scholar 

Jefferis H, Price N, Jackson S. Pregnancy following laparoscopic hysteropexy—a case series. Gynecol Surg. 2017;14(1):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s10397-017-1017-1.

Article  Google Scholar 

Braun NM, Andraos W, Bettin S. Safety and efficacy of spider anchoring device for apical repair in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: retrospective cohort study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2019;235:88–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.02.013.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ridgeway BM. Does prolapse equal hysterectomy? the role of uterine conservation in women with uterovaginal prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213(6):802–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.07.035.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Pan K, Cao L, Ryan NA, Wang Y, Xu H. Laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(1):93–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-015-2775-9.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Zwain O, Aoun J, Eisenstein D. Minimally invasive surgery in pelvic floor repair. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;29(4):276–81. https://doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0000000000000377.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Dedden SJ, Werner MA, Steinweg J, et al. Hysterectomy and sexual function: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sex Med. 2023;20(4):447–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/jsxmed/qdac051.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Darwish M, Atlantis E, Mohamed-Taysir T. Psychological outcomes after hysterectomy for benign conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;174(1):5–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.12.017.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Korbly NB, Kassis NC, Good MM, et al. Patient preferences for uterine preservation and hysterectomy in women with pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(5):470.e1-470.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2013.08.003.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Celik H, Gurates B, Yavuz A, Nurkalem C, Hanay F, Kavak B. The effect of hysterectomy and bilaterally salpingo-oophorectomy on sexual function in post-menopausal women. Maturitas. 2008;61(4):358–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2008.09.015.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Goktas SB, Gun I, Yildiz T, Sakar MN, Caglayan S. The effect of total hysterectomy on sexual function and depression. Pakistan J Med Sci. 2015;31(3):700–705. https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.313.7368.

Doğanay M, Kokanalı D, Kokanalı MK, Cavkaytar S, Aksakal OS. Comparison of female sexual function in women who underwent abdominal or vaginal hysterectomy with or without bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2019;48(1):29–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogoh.2018.11.004.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Thakar R. Is the uterus a sexual organ? sexual function following hysterectomy. Sex Med Rev. 2015;3(4):264–78. https://doi.org/10.1002/smrj.59.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Thakar R, Manyonda I, Stanton SL, Clarkson P, Robinson G. Bladder, bowel and sexual function after hysterectomy for benign conditions. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104(9):983–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb12053.x.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Cooper R, Mishra G, Hardy R, Kuh D. Hysterectomy and subsequent psychological health: findings from a British birth cohort study. J Affect Disord. 2009;115(1–2):122–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2008.08.017.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Johannesson U, Amato M, Forsgren C. Pelvic floor and sexual function 3 years after hysterectomy – a prospective cohort study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2024;103(3):580–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.14751.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Yurtkal A, Canday M. Optimizing hysterectomy: a prospective comparative analysis of surgical techniques and their impact on women’s lives. J Pers Med. 2024;14(3):1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm14030265.

Article  Google Scholar 

Nygaard I, Barber MD, Burgio KL, Kenton K, Meikle S, Schaffer J, et al. PN and SS Prevalence of symptomatic POP. JAMA. 2008;23(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.300.11.1311.Prevalence.

Article  Google Scholar 

Andebrhan SB, Caron AT, Szlachta-McGinn A, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse recurrence after pregnancy following uterine-sparing prolapse repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2023;34(2):345–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-022-05306-2.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Bø K, Hilde G. Retest reliability of surface electromyography on the pelvic floor musclesGrape, HH Dedering, A Jonasson AF. Neurourol Urodyn. 2013;32(April):215–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Vašíček M, Pilka R, Eim JB. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy using Seratex Slimsling: pilot study. Ces Gynekol. 2019;84(6):412–7.

Google Scholar 

SERATEX® SlimSling®: SERAG-WIESSNER. Accessed July 1, 2024. https://www.serag-wiessner.de/en/products/textile-implants/seratexr-slimsling.