Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20393938›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010

Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women.

Christopher Maher, Benjamin Feiner, Kaven Baessler, Cathryn Ma Glazener

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 98 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
98citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT01347021 phase4unknown statusnot on this map

Sacrospinous Colpopexy Versus High Uterosacral Colpopexy in the Treatment of Genital Prolapse Grade III/IV in Women With Uterus

TypeinterventionalSponsorFederal University of São PauloRan2006 to 2011Enrolled51ConditionsUterovaginal Prolapse, Prolapse of Vaginal Vault After Hysterectomy, Complete Tear, Sacrospinous Ligament, Uterosacral LigamentArmssacrospinous colpopexy versus high uterosacral colpopexy
NCT02856217 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of the Tunneling or Non-tunneling During Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy in Terms of Lower Urinary Tract and Bowel Symptoms.

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe University of Texas Medical Branch, GalvestonRan2016 to 2018Enrolled60ConditionsLower Urinary Tract Symptoms, Lower Gastrointestinal Tract SymptomsArmstunneling, non-tunneling
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

98 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,121 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  3. Pessaries (mechanical devices) for pelvic organ prolapse in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  4. Conservative prevention and management of pelvic organ prolapse in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

38 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Christopher MaherWesley Urogynaecology Unit, Wesley Hospital, Sandford Jackson Building - Level 4, Suite 86, 30 Chasely Street, Auchenflower, Queensland, Australia, 4066.
Benjamin Feiner
Kaven Baessler
Cathryn Ma Glazener
Wesley Hospital · AUCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEUniversity of Aberdeen · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPelvic organ prolapse may occur in up to 50% of parous women. A variety of urinary, bowel and sexual symptoms may be associated with the prolapse.

objectivesTo determine the effects of the many different surgeries used in the management of pelvic organ prolapse. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register (9 February 2009) and reference lists of relevant articles. We also contacted researchers in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that included surgical operations for pelvic organ prolapse. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trials were assessed and data extracted independently by two review authors. Six investigators were contacted for additional information with five responding. MAIN

resultsForty randomised controlled trials were identified evaluating 3773 women. Abdominal sacral colpopexy was better than vaginal sacrospinous colpopexy in terms of a lower rate of recurrent vault prolapse (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.77) and less dyspareunia (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.86). However there was no statistically significant difference in re-operation rates for prolapse (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.11). The vaginal sacrospinous colpopexy was quicker and cheaper to perform and women had an earlier return to activities of daily living. The three trials contributing to this analysis were clinically heterogeneous.For anterior vaginal wall prolapse, standard anterior repair was associated with more recurrent cystoceles than when supplemented with a polyglactin mesh inlay (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.90) or porcine dermis mesh inlay (RR 2.72, 95% CI 1.20 to 6.14); but data on morbidity and other clinical outcomes were lacking. Standard anterior repair was associated with more anterior compartment failures on examination than for polypropylene mesh repair as an overlay (RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.23 to 3.74) or armed transobturator mesh (RR 3.55, 95% CI 2.29 to 5.51). Data relating to polypropylene mesh overlay were extracted from conference abstracts without any peer reviewed manuscripts available and should be interpreted with caution. No differences in subjective outcomes, quality of life data, de novo dyspareunia, stress incontinence, re-operation rates for prolapse or incontinence were identified. Blood loss with transobturator meshes was significantly higher than for native tissue anterior repair. Mesh erosions were reported in 10% (30/293) of anterior repairs with polypropylene mesh.For posterior vaginal wall prolapse, the vaginal approach was associated with a lower rate of recurrent rectocele or enterocele, or both, than the transanal approach (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.64); although there was a higher blood loss and post-operative narcotic use. No data exist on efficacy or otherwise of polypropylene mesh in the posterior vaginal compartment.Meta-analysis on the impact of continence surgery at the time of prolapse surgery was performed with data from seven studies. Continence surgery at the time of prolapse surgery in continent women did not significantly reduce the rate of post-operative stress urinary incontinence (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.53 to 3.70; random-effects model). AUTHORS'

conclusionsAbdominal sacral colpopexy was associated with a lower rate of recurrent vault prolapse and dyspareunia than with vaginal sacrospinous colpopexy. These benefits must be balanced against a longer operating time, longer time to return to activities of daily living and increased cost of the abdominal approach. The use of mesh or graft inlays at the time of anterior vaginal wall repair reduces the risk of recurrent anterior wall prolapse, on examination. Posterior vaginal wall repair may be better than transanal repair in the management of rectoceles in terms of recurrence of prolapse. The value of the addition of a continence procedure to a prolapse repair operation in women who are dry before operation remains to be assessed. Adequately powered randomised controlled clinical trials are urgently needed on a wide variety of issues and particularly need to include women's perceptions of prolapse symptoms.

Indexed as

FemaleGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansPelvic Organ ProlapseRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRectal ProlapseSecondary PreventionSurgical MeshSuture TechniquesUrinary Bladder DiseasesUrinary IncontinenceUterine Prolapse

Identifiers

PMID20393938
OpenAlexW2149815829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.