ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2013
The improvement of pelvic floor muscle function in POP patients after the Prolift procedure: results from surface electromyography.
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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Synthetic Mesh Reconstruction Improves Pelvic Floor Function and Quality of Life After Sacrectomy: A Preliminary Clinical Assessment.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2025Article
- Impact of preoperative pelvic floor muscle function on the success of surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2024Observational
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisPatients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) have lower pelvic floor muscle (PFM) function. We hypothesized that pelvic reconstructive surgery could improve PFM function and strength.
methodsThe controlled, nonrandomized study recruited 37 POP patients in the Prolift group and 30 non-POP patients in the control group. Two urogynecologists performed the Prolift procedure. One experienced physiotherapist who was blinded to the grouping conducted the surface electromyography (SEMG) evaluation using an intravaginal probe. The patient was considered objectively cured if she had stage 0 or I according to the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system (POP-Q) at the 3rd month postoperatively. Two types of contractions, namely maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) and short, fast contractions (SFC) in 6 s were performed at each SEMG measurement. The SEMG data were collected once in the control group on admission and twice in the Prolift group (on admission and at the 3rd month postoperatively). The t test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Wilcoxon test were used for statistical analysis.
resultsA total of 36 POP patients were cured by the Prolift procedure. At the 3-month follow-up, the voltage and duration of MVC as well as the numbers and voltage of SFC increased significantly in the Prolift group. These variables were lower in POP patients compared to women without POP.
conclusionsThe restoration of pelvic anatomy may account for the improved PFM function with increased electrical activity in POP patients verified by SEMG. Evaluation of PFM function may be used as a clinical tool in the overall assessment of pelvic reconstructive surgeries.
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.