ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2014
Labhardt's colpoperineocleisis: subjective results of an alternative treatment for genital prolapse in patients who are not sexually active--2-year follow-up.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Making What Is Old New Again: A Narrative Review Informing Expert Consensus on Obliterative Management of Primary Uterovaginal Prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2026Review
- Surgical and quality of life outcomes after pelvic organ prolapse surgery in older postmenopausal women.Przeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review · 2021Article
- Colpocleisis with a skin flap.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- Outcomes of vaginal hysterectomy and constricting colporrhaphy with concurrent levator myorrhaphy and high perineorrhaphy in women older than 75 years of age.Clinical interventions in aging · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisGenital prolapse affects up to 50 % of multiparous women and has an impact on quality of life (QoL) for many. Vaginal obliterative techniques are relevant in older patients who are not sexually active. We performed Labhardt's colpoperineocleisis in such patients. The objective was the evaluation of subjective outcomes of this technique using PGI-I.
methodsRetrospective cohort analysis of patients. We performed a bivariate, multivariate analysis, and survival curves for subjective improvement.
resultsSeventy-four cases were analyzed. Average age of the patients was 72 years, median parity 4, 95.9 % POP-Q stage III or IV, anterior leading edge defect in 61.1 %. Operating time: 54 min, estimated blood loss 70 ml, no intraoperative complications, 12 patients had protocol deviations with changes in the recommended type of suture. Median hospital stay was 2 days and average follow-up 24.9 months. There was 13.5 % anatomical recurrence, 3 of which (30 %) were in patients with protocol deviations. 1.9 % developed clinically significant de novo stress urinary incontinence (SUI). PGI-I: 64 (86 %) reported subjective improvement and 10 did not. In the subjective improvement group, 98.4 % reported being very much or much better. In the non-subjective improvement group 80 % reported that they were the same as before surgery and 20 % were worse. In bivariate analysis anatomical recurrence showed significance and persisted after multivariate analysis with an OR of 8322 for subjective failure.
conclusionLabhardt's colpoperineocleisis is a safe technique with good subjective results. It has few complications, an acceptable recurrence rate, and a low rate of de novo SUI. It may be important to use the #0 or #1 polydioxanone sutures, as these are associated with better outcomes in this series. Comparative studies with other obliterative techniques are needed.
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.