ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2015
Sacral colpopexy: long-term mesh complications requiring reoperation(s).
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spondylodiscitis After Surgery for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Description of a Rare Complication and Systematic Review of the Literature.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Pelvic floor biomechanical reconstruction for moderate to severe pelvic organ prolapse: two-year outcomes of anatomical restoration and urinary continence.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Management of Sacrocolpopexy Mesh Complications-A Narrative Review and Clinical Experience from a Large-Volume Center.International urogynecology journal · 2025Review
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of the pelvic organ prolapse and vaginal prolapse among the global population.BJUI compass · 2025Review
- Mesh exposure following minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: a narrative review.International urogynecology journal · 2022Review
- Strengthen the sacral ligament and paravagina by equilibrium control severe pelvic organ prolapse.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Conservative Management of Spondylodiscitis after Laparoscopic Sacral Colpopexy: A Case Report and Review of Literature.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2021Review
- Long-term pelvic organ prolapse recurrence and mesh exposure following sacrocolpopexy.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy with polyester fiber suture: Ozerkan modification.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- Joint position statement on the management of mesh-related complications for the FPMRS specialist.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- Laparoscopic complete sacrocolpopexy mesh removal for right-sided gluteal pain and recurrent mesh erosion.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- Sacrocolpopexy: Patient Outcomes Support the Use of Non-Crosslinked Acellular Dermal Matrix as an Alternative to the Synthetic Polypropylene Mesh.Journal of gynecologic surgery · 2019Article
- Reoperations for mesh-related complications after pelvic organ prolapse repair: 8-year experience at a tertiary referral center.International urogynecology journal · 2017Article
- Mesh complications and failure rates after transvaginal mesh repair compared with abdominal or laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and to native tissue repair in treating apical prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2017Article
- Native tissue repair for central compartment prolapse: a narrative review.International urogynecology journal · 2017Review
- [Complications after rectal prolapse surgery].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2015Review
- Systematic reviews of apical prolapse surgery: are we being misled down a dangerous path?International urogynecology journal · 2015Article
- Spondylodiscitis after minimally invasive recto- and colpo-sacropexy: Report of a case and systematic review of the literature.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisSacral colpopexy (SC) is a classic procedure used for the surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Although the procedure boasts excellent success rates, there are risks of complications and reoperation may be required. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the extent of complications following SC, requiring reoperation(s), and to describe the reoperations performed.
methodsA retrospective monocentric study of patients who were operated on following a mesh complication after SC was conducted, at Lille University Hospital, between January 2007 and January 2013. Information relating to medical and surgical history, SC surgical technique, type of complication, and reoperation techniques was gathered.
resultsTwenty-seven patients required surgery for complications after SC. Nineteen patients were treated for vaginal mesh exposures (VME), four for intravesical mesh (including one with VME), one for ano-rectal dyschezia, one for spondylodiscitis with a VME, one for mesh infection, and one for vaginal fistula communicating with a collection in the ischio-coccygeal muscle. The median time between the initial SC and the first reoperation was 3.9 ± 5.7 years. The median operating time was 40 ± 95 min, and the length of hospital stay was 3.0 ± 3.0 days. Ten patients needed several interventions.
conclusionThis case series provides a description of surgical interventions for complications related to sacral colpopexy. These complications may be serious and occur years after the initial surgery.
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.