V247: Robotic Sacrocolpopexy: Use of barbed sutures: Introduction and Objective

V247: Robotic Sacrocolpopexy: Use of barbed sutures: Introduction and Objective


Introduction and Objectives
Since their advent, delayed-absorbable uni-directional barbed sutures have been applied to an increasing array of surgeries, with proponents claiming that the barbs provide for a more secure closure in multiple rows while decreasing operative times by obviating the need for knot tying._x000D_ We evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of using the unidirectional barbed V-Loc suture in robotic sacrocolpopexies and compare it with the standard PDS suture.

We retrospectively reviewed patients who consecutively underwent robotic sacrocolpopexies using either the standard PDS suture or the delayed-absorbable uni-directional barbed suture in the past nine months.

A total of 13 patients were evaluated, all of whom underwent a robotic sacrocolpopexy. 6 women underwent a robotic sacrocolpexy using the delayed-absorable uni-directional barbed suture (V-Loc suture), while 7 underwent surgery using the standard PDS suture. 83.3% in the barbed suture group underwent a concomitant transobturator tape sling, vs. 85.7% in the standard group. 33.3% of the barbed suture group had a concomitant surgery, compared to 71.4% in the standard group. Average age (barbed suture group: 64.0 years, standard group: 62.6 years) and BMI (V-Loc group: 28.1, standard group: 26.5) were similar between groups. The barbed suture group had a higher percentage of patients with a history of previous prolapse repair (66.7% vs. 14.3% in the standard group) and a lower average POP-Q score (2.2 vs. 2.7 in the standard group). The OR time in the V-Loc group was slightly less than that of the standard group (230.7 vs. 248.1 minutes), as was EBL (55ml vs. 82.9ml). Follow-up time was less for the V-loc group (6.9 vs. 13.6 weeks), and hospital stay and complication rates were similar.

Delayed-absorbable uni-directional barbed suture (V loc) can easily be implemented during robotic sacrocolpopexies in a safe and efficacious manner.

Funding: none