ArticleIndian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India2014
Robotic sacrocolpopexy.
Article in Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for treatment of prolapse of the apical segment of the vagina: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International urogynecology journal · 2016Pooled it
- Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse by Robotic Sacrocolpopexy: Long-Term Outcomes.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Concomitant Hysterectomy and vNOTES-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy: A Feasible and Safe Scarless Approach for Apical Prolapse Repair.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Is robotic-assisted sacrocolpo(hystero)pexy safe and effective in women over 65 years of age?International urogynecology journal · 2021Article
- Perioperative adverse events in women over age 65 undergoing robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- Surgical management of female pelvic organ prolapse with and without urinary incontinence: A single center experience.Medicine · 2017Observational
- Management of pelvic organ prolapse in the elderly - is there a role for robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy?Robotic surgery (Auckland) · 2016Review
- Robotic Sacrocolpopexy with Autologous Fascia Lata: A Case Series.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
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
Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a prevalent condition with 1 in 9 women seeking surgical treatment by the age of 80 years. Goals of treatment are relief and prevention of symptoms, and restoration of pelvic floor support. The gold standard for surgical treatment of POP has been abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC). However, emerging technologies have allowed for more minimally invasive approach including the use of laparoscopic assisted sacrocolpopexy and robotic assisted sacrocolpopexy (RASC). We performed a PubMed literature search for sacrocolpopexy, "robotic sacrocolpopexy" and "RASC" and reviewed all retrospective, prospective and randomized controlled trials. The techniques, objective and subjective outcomes and complications are discussed. The most frequent technique involves a polypropylene Y mesh attached to the anterior and posterior walls of the vagina with the single arm attached to the sacrum. Multiple concomitant procedures have been described including hysterectomy, anti-incontinence procedures and concomitant vaginal prolapse repairs. There are few studies comparing RASC to ASC, with the longest follow-up data showing no difference in subjective and objective outcomes. Anatomic success rates have been reported at 79-100% with up to 9% of patients requiring successive surgery for recurrence. Subjective success is poorly defined, but has been reported at 88-97%. Most common complications are urinary retention, urinary tract infection, bladder injury and vaginal mucosal injury. Mesh exposure is reported in up to 10% of patients. RASC allows for a minimally invasive approach to treatment of POP with comparable outcomes and low complication rates.
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.