ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2013
Comparative analysis of pelvic ligaments: a biomechanics study.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Expression changes in pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and in silico study.Scientific reports · 2017Pooled it
- Comparison of Postoperative Functional Recovery and Anatomical Restoration in Patients with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Undergoing Three Types of Apical Suspension Techniques: A Retrospective Study.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Analysis of differences in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification scores at different anatomical sites before and after anesthesia for guiding surgical planning in female patients with pelvic organ prolapse.Asian journal of urology · 2026Article
- Fortifying the foundation: assessing the role of uterine ligament integrity in uterine prolapse and beyond.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Review
- Ex Vivo Uniaxial Tensile Properties of Rat Uterosacral Ligaments.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2023Article
- Urethral support in female urinary continence part 2: a computational, biomechanical analysis of Valsalva.International urogynecology journal · 2022Article
- Mechanics of Uterosacral Ligaments: Current Knowledge, Existing Gaps, and Future Directions.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2021Review
- Age-related changes in mechanical properties of human abdominal fascia.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2020Article
- From molecular to macro: the key role of the apical ligaments in uterovaginal support.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2020Review
- Comparison of Biaxial Biomechanical Properties of Post-menopausal Human Prolapsed and Non-prolapsed Uterosacral Ligament.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Review of In Vitro Testing of Pelvic Support Mechanisms.Ochsner journal · 2020Review
- Development of anatomically based customizable three-dimensional finite-element model of pelvic floor support system: POP-SIM1.0.Interface focus · 2019Article
- Managing female pelvic floor disorders: a medical device review and appraisal.Interface focus · 2019Review
- Mechanical Analysis of the Uterosacral Ligament: Swine vs. Human.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2018Article
- Modelling of Soft Connective Tissues to Investigate Female Pelvic Floor Dysfunctions.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2018Article
- Tips and tricks for uterosacral ligament suspension: how to avoid ureteral injury.International urogynecology journal · 2018Article
- Transvaginal uterosacral ligament suspension for posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse repair.International urogynecology journal · 2017Article
- Architectural differences in the anterior and middle compartments of the pelvic floor of young-adult and postmenopausal females.Journal of anatomy · 2017Article
- Female pelvic floor biomechanics: bridging the gap.Current opinion in urology · 2017Review
- Modified McCall culdoplasty versus Shull suspension in pelvic prolapse primary repair: a retrospective study.International urogynecology journal · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisPelvic organ prolapse (POP) affects one third of women of all ages and is a major concern for gynecological surgeons. In pelvic reconstructive surgery, native ligaments are widely used as a corrective support, while their biomechanical properties are unknown. We hypothesized differences in the strength of various pelvic ligaments and therefore, aimed to evaluate and compare their biomechanical properties. MATERIALS AND
methodsSamples from the left and right broad, round, and uterosacral ligaments from 13 fresh female cadavers without pelvic organ prolapse were collected. Uniaxial tension tests at a constant rate of deformation were performed and stress-strain curves were obtained.
resultsWe observed a non-linear stress-strain relationship and a hyperelastic mechanical behavior of the tissues. The uterosacral ligaments were the most rigid whether at low or high deformation, while the round ligament was more rigid than the broad ligament.
conclusionPelvic ligaments differ in their biomechanical properties and there is fairly good evidence that the uterosacral ligaments play an important role in the maintenance of pelvic support from a biomechanical point of view.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22751993What 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.