Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26142350›Full record

ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2015

Retrospective comparison between the Prolift and Elevate anterior vaginal mesh procedures: 18-month clinical outcome.

Artur Rogowski, Przemyslaw Bienkowski, Dariusz Tarwacki, Monika Szafarowska, Jerzy Samochowiec, Halina Sienkiewicz-Jarosz, Malgorzata Jerzak, Wlodzimierz Baranowski

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Pelvic organ prolapse and sexual function.Nature reviews. Urology · 2020
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Artur RogowskiDepartment of Gynecology and Oncological Gynecology, Military Institute of Medicine, 128 Szaserow Street, 04-141, Warsaw, Poland. arogowski@op.pl.
Przemyslaw BienkowskiInstitute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland.
Dariusz TarwackiDepartment of Gynecology and Oncological Gynecology, Military Institute of Medicine, 128 Szaserow Street, 04-141, Warsaw, Poland.
Monika SzafarowskaDepartment of Gynecology and Oncological Gynecology, Military Institute of Medicine, 128 Szaserow Street, 04-141, Warsaw, Poland.
Jerzy SamochowiecDepartment of Psychiatry, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland.
Halina Sienkiewicz-JaroszInstitute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland.
Malgorzata JerzakDepartment of Gynecology and Oncological Gynecology, Military Institute of Medicine, 128 Szaserow Street, 04-141, Warsaw, Poland.
Wlodzimierz BaranowskiDepartment of Gynecology and Oncological Gynecology, Military Institute of Medicine, 128 Szaserow Street, 04-141, Warsaw, Poland.
Military Institute · RUInstitute of Psychiatry and Neurology · PLPomeranian Medical University · PLWojskowy Instytut Medycyny Lotniczej · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introduction and hypothesisThere are few direct comparisons between the first-generation trocar-guided and the second-generation single-incision mesh systems in the treatment of anterior pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Hence, the purpose of this retrospective review was to compare 18-month operative success in female patients who had undergone POP surgery with the anterior Prolift (n = 52) or the anterior Elevate mesh (n = 62).

methodsSubjective (bulge symptoms) and objective measures (absence of anterior or apical descent beyond the hymen, POP-Q anterior stage 0 or I, no retreatment for POP) were used as the measures of surgical efficacy. Postoperative pelvic floor pain, dyspareunia, de novo overactive bladder (OAB), de novo stress urinary incontinence (SUI), and mesh exposure were addressed as complications of POP surgery.

resultsThe two groups did not differ with regard to the subjective and objective measures of the operative efficacy. There were no between-group differences in the proportion of women reporting postoperative pelvic floor pain, dyspareunia, de novo SUI, and de novo OAB symptoms (all p values >0.05). The proportion of patients with postoperative vaginal exposure was significantly higher in the Prolift group (7.7 %) than in the Elevate group (0.0 %; p = 0.02).

conclusionsIn conclusion, our results suggest that the use of the Elevate system in patients with anterior compartment prolapse results in fewer mesh erosions, but similar efficacy, compared with the Prolift mesh.

Indexed as

Postoperative ComplicationsSurgical MeshAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPelvic Organ ProlapseRetrospective StudiesTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeElevate meshOperative successPelvic organ prolapseProlift mesh

Identifiers

PMID26142350
OpenAlexW804557142

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.