(1) Objective: We aimed to report an update of the systematic review and meta-analysis by Baekelandt et al. (2016). (2) Method: We followed PRISMA guidelines to perform this systematic review. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and additional sources and aimed to retrieve randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs) and prospective/retrospective cohort studies in human subjects that allowed direct comparison of vNOTES to laparoscopy. (3) Results: Our search yielded one RCT and five retrospective cohort trials. Pooled analysis of two subgroups showed that, compared to conventional laparoscopy, vNOTES is equally effective to successfully remove the uterus in individuals meeting the inclusion criteria. vNOTES had significantly lower values for operation time, length of stay and estimated blood loss. There was no significant difference in intra- and postoperative complications, readmission, pain scores at 24 h postoperative and change in hemoglobin (Hb) on day 1 postoperative.

Objective To investigate whether laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy (LSH) is non‐inferior to vaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSHP) in the surgical treatment of uterine prolapse. Design Multicentre randomised controlled, non‐blinded non‐inferiority trial. Setting Five non‐university teaching hospitals in the Netherlands, one university hospital in Belgium. Population 126 women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher undergoing surgery without previous pelvic floor surgery. Methods Randomisation in a 1:1 ratio to LSH or SSHP, stratified per centre and severity of the uterine prolapse. The predefined inferiority margin was an increase in surgical failure rate of 10%. Main outcome measures Primary outcome was surgical failure, defined as recurrence of uterine prolapse (POP‐Q ≥ 2) with bothersome bulging/protrusion symptoms and/or repeat surgery or pessary at 12 months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were anatomical recurrence (any compartment), functional outcome and quality of life. Results Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy was non‐inferior for surgical failure (n = 1, 1.6%) compared with SSHP (n = 2, 3.3%, difference −1.7%, 95% CI: −7.1 to 3.7) 12 months postoperatively. Overall, anatomical recurrences and quality of life did not differ. More bothersome symptoms of overactive bladder (OAB) and faecal incontinence were reported after LSH. Dyspareunia was more frequently reported after SSHP. Conclusion Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy was non‐inferior to SSHP for surgical failure of the apical compartment at 12 months’ follow up. Following LSH, bothersome OAB and faecal incontinence were more frequent, but dyspareunia was less frequent. Tweetable abstract Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy and vaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy have equally good short‐term outcomes.

The use of robot-assisted surgery (RAS) has gained popularity in the field of gynaecology, including pelvic floor surgery. To assess the benefits of RAS, we conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic and robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy. The Cochrane Library (1970–January 2015), MEDLINE (1966 to January 2015), and EMBASE (1974 to January 2015) were searched, as well as ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We identified two randomized trials (n = 78) comparing laparoscopic with robotic sacrocolpopexy. The Paraiso 2011 study showed that laparoscopic was faster than robotic sacrocolpopexy (199 ± 46 vs. 265 ± 50 min; p < .001), yet in the ACCESS trial, no difference was present (225 ± 62.3 vs. 246.5 ± 51.3 min; p = .110). Costs for using the robot were significantly higher in both studies, however, in the ACCESS trial, only when purchase and maintenance of the robot was included (LSC US$11,573 ± 3191 vs. RASC US$19,616 ± 3135; p < .001). In the Paraiso study, RASC was more expensive even without considering those costs (LSC US$ 14,342 ± 2941 vs. RASC 16,278 ± 3326; p = 0.008). Pain was reportedly higher after RASC, although at different time points after the operation. There were no differences in anatomical outcomes, pelvic floor function, and quality of life. The experience with RASC was tenfold lower than that with LSC in both studies. The heterogeneity between the two studies precluded a meta-analysis. Based on small randomized studies, with surgeons less experienced in RAS than in laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery significantly increases the cost of a laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. RASC would be more sustainable if its costs would be lower. Though RASC may have other benefits, such as reduction of the learning curve and increased ergonomics or dexterity, these remain to be demonstrated.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10397-016-0930-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objective To assess whether CO2 laser treatment is more effective than sham application in relieving the most bothersome symptom (MBS) in women with genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM). Design Single‐centre, sham‐controlled, double‐blind, randomised trial. Setting A tertiary centre in Belgium. Population Sixty women with moderate to severe GSM symptoms. Methods All participants eventually received three consecutive laser and three consecutive sham applications, either first laser followed by sham, or conversely. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was the participant‐reported change in severity of the MBS at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included subjective (patient satisfaction, sexual function, urinary function) and objective (pH, Vaginal Health Index Score, in vivo microscopy) measurements assessing the short‐term effect and the longevity of treatment effects at 18 months after start of the therapy. Adverse events were reported at every visit. Results The MBS severity score decreased from 2.86 ± 0.35 to 2.17 ± 0.93 (−23.60%; 95% CI −36.10% to −11.10%) in women treated with laser compared with 2.90 ± 0.31 to 2.52 ± 0.78 (−13.20%; 95% CI −22.70% to −3.73%) in those receiving sham applications (p = 0.13). There were no serious adverse events reported up to 18 months. Conclusions In women with GSM, the treatment response 12 weeks after laser application was comparable to that of sham applications. There were no obvious differences for secondary outcomes and no serious adverse events were reported.

<b><i>Study Objective:</i></b> Vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) is a novel minimal invasive surgical technique allowing a variety of gynecological procedures. The current literature describes improved patient comfort, improved better cosmetic results, and reduced operation time. This is a first study to assess pregnancy outcome after fertility-preserving vNOTES procedures. <b><i>Design/Participants/Materials/Setting/Methods:</i></b> We performed a retrospective observational cohort study including 125 patients under 43 years that underwent fertility-preserving vNOTES over a 5-year period (2014–2019). The gynecological surgical procedures included were vNOTES myomectomy, vNOTES salpingectomy for ectopic pregnancy, vNOTES unilateral adnexectomy, and vNOTES cystectomy. A total of 26 pregnancies in 21 cases were observed, with deliveries between 2015 and 2020. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Retrospective analysis in this patient group showed that 18 pregnancies were diagnosed within 1 year after vNOTES (85.7%). Mean interval between surgery and pregnancy was 6 months. Fertility treatment was performed in 28.6%. In the 26 observed pregnancies, no vNOTES-related complications were observed and delivery was at term in all cases. Mode of delivery was a vaginal delivery in twenty cases (76.9% of total) of which 2 cases vacuum assisted (7.7%) and a Caesarean section in 6 cases (23.1% of total). Two cases of trial of labor after Caesarean are described after vNOTES surgery, both ended in an uncomplicated vaginal delivery. In case of vaginal delivery, the perineum was intact in 15%, a mediolateral episiotomy was performed in 50 and 35% a grade 1–2 perineal rupture was described. No grade 3–4 perineal ruptures are described. <b><i>Limitations:</i></b> A limitation of this study is the retrospective design which does not correct for confounding factors. Further larger multicenter studies are needed to validate these data. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> This is the first study describing pregnancy outcome after fertility-preserving vNOTES procedures. vNOTES did not affect the mode of delivery or cause pregnancy-related complications. vNOTES did not increase the risk of extensive perineal tears during vaginal delivery. These preliminary data show no adverse events when vNOTES is performed in women of reproductive age. Posterior colpotomy as performed in all vNOTES procedures is by itself not an indication for an elective Caesarean section.