Cosmetic Appearance of Port-site Scars 1 Year After Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Sacrocolpopexy: A Supplementary Study of the ACCESS Clinical Trial

Elizabeth Rose Mueller*, Kimberly Kenton, Jennifer T. Anger, Catherine Bresee, Christopher Tarnay

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Scopus citations


Study Objective To prospectively measure trocar site appearances 1 year after surgery in women participants in the Abdominal Colpopexy: Comparison of Endoscopic Surgical Strategies Trial, a 2-center randomized surgical trial (NCT01124916). Design Supplementary analysis of a surgical trial that randomized women to robotic or laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (Canadian Task Force classification I). Setting Operative trial. Patients Women undergoing clinically indicated sacrocolpopexy for symptomatic stage ≥II pelvic organ prolapse were randomized to laparoscopic abdominal sacrocolpopexy (LASC) or robotic abdominal sacrocolpopexy (RASC). Trocar skin incision closure was standardized by using Dermabond (Ethicon, Somerville, NJ). Measurements and Main Results Photographs of all incision sites were taken at baseline (immediately), 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year after surgery. Study coordinators scored each incision with the validated Stony Brook Evaluation Scale (SBES), a 5-point wound evaluation scale. We calculated the average of all scars scores per case to determine the percent of optimal wound healing (0%–100%) for each case as well as the proportion of cases meeting 100% wound repair scoring. Wound repair scores across groups were tested with the Wilcoxon rank sum test. The overall proportion of cases in each group meeting “optimal” wound recovery (scores of 100%) was tested with the Fisher exact test. Seventy-eight women with a mean age of 59 years (range, 26–79 years) were randomized to LASC (n = 38) or RASC (n = 40). We did not detect significant differences in baseline characteristics or rates of dropout between the 2 study groups (5 in LASC and 7 in RASC, p = .60). Pain in the initial postoperative period was higher in the robotic arm although groups were similar at 2 weeks. Nearly all cases (75/78) contributed wound repair data (36 laparoscopic and 39 robotic). Laparoscopic surgeries require significantly fewer incisions (median = 4; range, 4–6) than robotic surgeries (median = 5; range, 4–6; p < .001). SBES scores at 6 weeks were not different for LASC and RASC (p = .426). By 6 months, the scores were better in the LASC group (84.8% ± 8.8% vs 78.5% ± 7.2%, p = .031), and this finding remained at 1 year (93.4% ± 7.2% vs 85.9% ± 8.8%, p = .001). The proportion of cases with optimal wound repair (score of 100%) was higher in the laparoscopic arm at 1 year after surgery (12/27 vs 4/33, p = .008). Interventions Women were randomized to robotic assisted laparoscopy or laparoscopy. Conclusion Wound appearance using the SBES was better in the LASC group, suggesting that there may be alterations in the mechanism for wound initiation and/or healing based on the minimally invasive route used for sacrocolpopexy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)917-921
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology
Issue number6
StatePublished - Sep 1 2016


  • Laparoscopic
  • Prolapse
  • Robotic
  • Sacrocolpopexy
  • Scar
  • Wound healing

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology


Dive into the research topics of 'Cosmetic Appearance of Port-site Scars 1 Year After Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Sacrocolpopexy: A Supplementary Study of the ACCESS Clinical Trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this