ReviewInternational urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction2009
Vaginal surgery for uterine descent; which options do we have? A review of the literature.
Review in International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment outcomes of Manchester procedure versus vaginal hysterectomy for mid-compartment prolapse: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Pooled it
- Sacrospinous hysteropexy: review and meta-analysis of outcomes.International urogynecology journal · 2017Pooled it
- Where to for pelvic organ prolapse treatment after the FDA pronouncements? A systematic review of the recent literature.International urogynecology journal · 2013Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy with suspension of the uterosacral ligaments in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: multicentre randomised non-inferiority trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2015Trial
- One-year follow-up after sacrospinous hysteropexy and vaginal hysterectomy for uterine descent: a randomized study.International urogynecology journal · 2010Trial
- Recurrent surgery in uterine prolapse: A nationwide register study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2022Article
- Pessary or surgery for a symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse: the PEOPLE study, a multicentre prospective cohort study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2022Article
- Manchester Operation: An Effective Treatment for Uterine Prolapse Caused by True Cervical Elongation.Yonsei medical journal · 2019Article
- How do patients and surgeons decide on uterine preservation or hysterectomy in apical prolapse?International urogynecology journal · 2018Article
- In the footsteps of Bonney and Nichols: hysterectomy during surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2017Article
- Cervical amputation versus vaginal hysterectomy: a population-based register study.International urogynecology journal · 2017Article
- The Manchester procedure versus vaginal hysterectomy in the treatment of uterine prolapse: a review.International urogynecology journal · 2017Review
- Uterine sparing surgical methods in pelvic organ prolapse.Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2015Review
- Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse and uterine descent in the Netherlands.International urogynecology journal · 2013Article
- Five-year outcome of uterus sparing surgery for pelvic organ prolapse repair: a single-center experience.International urogynecology journal · 2011Article
- Uterus preservation in pelvic organ prolapse surgery.Nature reviews. Urology · 2010Review
- Anatomical and functional outcomes of posterior intravaginal slingplasty for the treatment of vaginal vault or uterine prolapse: a prospective, multicenter study.Korean journal of urology · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedKoops, Steven E Schraffordt [corrected to Schraffordt Koops, Steven E]
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several vaginal procedures are available for treating uterine descent. Vaginal hysterectomy is usually the surgeon's first choice. In this literature review, complications, anatomical and symptomatic outcomes, and quality of life after vaginal hysterectomy, sacrospinous hysteropexy, the Manchester procedure, and posterior intravaginal slingplasty are described. All procedures had low complication rates, except posterior intravaginal slingplasty, with a tape erosion rate of 0-21%. Minimal anatomical success rates regarding apical support ranged from 85% and 93% in favor of the Manchester procedure. Data on symptomatic cure and quality of life are scarce. In studies comparing vaginal hysterectomy with sacrospinous hysteropexy or the Manchester procedure, vaginal hysterectomy had higher morbidity. Because no randomized, controlled trials have been performed comparing these surgical techniques, we can not conclude that one of the procedures prevails. However, one can conclude from the literature that vaginal hysterectomy is not the logical first choice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.