ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2014
Anterior colporrhaphy: why surgeon performance is paramount.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ten Years of Laparoscopic Pectopexy: A Case Series Analysis.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Shortening Indwelling Catheterization After Vaginal Surgery for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Results from a Prospective Randomized Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Tissue integrity and healing response in hypoestrogenic animal model treated by mesh implantation with addition of mesenchymal stem cell secretome.Open veterinary journal · 2025Review
- Failure of Expectations in Vaginal Surgery: Lack of Appropriate Consent, Goals and Expectations of Surgery.Current urology reports · 2016Review
- Recurrent pelvic organ prolapse: International Urogynecological Association Research and Development Committee opinion.International urogynecology journal · 2016Review
- Choice of pelvic organ prolapse surgery: vaginal or abdominal, native tissue or synthetic grafts, open abdominal versus laparoscopic or robotic.International urogynecology journal · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anterior compartment repair is one of the most challenging issues in reconstructive pelvic surgery. Previous studies using strict anatomic criteria suggested a high failure rate after anterior colporrhaphy, prompting increased use of augmented repairs in the past decade. More recent studies suggest anterior colporrhaphy may provide symptom relief similar to that seen with augmented repairs without the risks associated with placement of mesh. There is a wide range of success rates for anterior colporrhaphy in the literature. The wide variation implies surgeon performance is a key issue in the success or failure of anterior compartment repair. It is critical to begin measuring and reporting surgeon performance in research trials and monitoring surgeon performance in clinical practice in order to make meaningful comparisons of surgical techniques and improve patient care.
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.