SynthesisFemale pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery
Outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07359755 (A Comparative Analysis of Vaginal Mesh Surgery Versus Robotic-assisted Abdominal Mesh Surgery in the Treatment of Apical Genital Prolapse), which is not on this map. Cited by 37 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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.
A Comparative Analysis of Vaginal Mesh Surgery Versus Robotic-assisted Abdominal Mesh Surgery in the Treatment of Apical Genital Prolapse: a Prospective Randomized Non-inferiority Study.
Who cites it
37 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Laparoscopic Versus Robot-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review and bibliometric analysis of robot vs. laparoscopic surgery in urogynecology: current trends and future directions.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of synthetic mesh erosion and chronic pain rates after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review.International urogynecology journal · 2021Pooled it
- A prospective, nonrandomized clinical investigation of the da Vinci surgical system model IS5000.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Trial
- Robotic vs Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy During the Early Training Phase: A Single Center Study.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Trifecta Outcomes after Robotic Sacrocolpopexy with Dual Mesh in Single-center Cohort.European urology open science · 2026Review
- Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse by Robotic Sacrocolpopexy: Long-Term Outcomes.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic Meshless Lateral Suspension in Patients with Advanced Stage Pelvic Organ Prolapse. A Prospective Cohort Study with a Median 36-Month Follow-Up.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Article
- Robot-assisted anterior abdomino-vaginal mesh suspension for stress urinary incontinence associated with anterior compartment pelvic organ prolapse: technique, imaging workflow, and 12-month pilot outcomes.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic Sacrocolpopexy With Versus Without Supracervical Hysterectomy.International urogynecology journal · 2025Article
- Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation After Failed Sacrocolpopexy: A Case Series.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
- Robotic Rectus Abdominis Myoperitoneal Flap for Posterior Vaginal Wall Reconstruction: Experience at a Single Institution.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Very long-term outcomes of robotic mesh sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse repair.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Article
- Recurrent Pelvic Organ Prolapse after Sacrocolpopexy-A Surgical Challenge.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2023Article
- Learning curves and perioperative outcomes of single-incision robotic sacrocolpopexy on two different da VinciJournal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Article
- A robotic approach to management of failed sacrocolpopexy and sacrocolpopexy complications: a case series.International urogynecology journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesRobotic sacrocolpopexy has been rapidly incorporated into surgical practice without comprehensive and systematically published outcome data. The aim of this study was to systematically review the currently published peer-reviewed literature on robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with more than 6 months of anatomic outcome data.
methodsStudies were selected after applying predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria to a MEDLINE search. Two independent reviewers blinded to each other's results abstracted demographic data, perioperative information, and postoperative outcomes. The primary outcome assessed was anatomic success rate defined as less than or equal to pelvic organ prolapse quantification system (POP-Q) stage 1. A random effects model was performed for the meta-analysis of selected outcomes.
resultsThirteen studies were selected for the systematic review. Meta-analysis yielded a combined estimated success rate of 98.6% (95% confidence interval, 97.0%-100%). The combined estimated rate of mesh exposure/erosion was 4.1% (95% confidence interval, 1.4%-6.9%), and the rate of reoperation for mesh revision was 1.7%. The rates of reoperation for recurrent apical and nonapical prolapse were 0.8% and 2.5%, respectively. The most common surgical complication (excluding mesh erosion) was cystotomy (2.8%), followed by wound infection (2.4%).
conclusionsThe outcomes of this analysis indicate that robotic sacrocolpopexy is an effective surgical treatment of apical prolapse with high anatomic cure rate and low rate of complications.
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.