ArticlePloS one2016
Laparoscopic Pectopexy: A Biomechanical Analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does Round-Ligament-Based Non-Mesh Pectopexy Provide Durable and Effective Apical Support After Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy?Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- AbsorbaTackArchives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2023Article
- Robotic mesh-supported pectopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: expanding the options of pelvic floor repair.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Article
- Tacks vs. sutures: a biomechanical analysis of sacral bony fixation methods for laparoscopic apical fixations in the porcine model.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022Article
- A biomechanical analysis of different meshes for reconstructions of the pelvic floor in the porcine model.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022Article
- Suturing methods in prolapse surgery: a biomechanical analysis.International urogynecology journal · 2021Article
- Laparoscopic Long Mesh Surgery with Augmented Round Ligaments: A Novel Uterine Preservation Procedure For Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Comparison of the Quality of Life and Female Sexual Function Following Laparoscopic Pectopexy and Laparoscopic Sacrohysteropexy in Apical Prolapse Patients.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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPectopexy, a laparoscopic method for prolapse surgery, showed promising results in recent literature. Further improving this approach by reducing surgical time may decrease complication rates and patient morbidity. Since laparoscopic suturing is a time consuming task, we propose a single suture /mesh ileo-pectineal ligament fixation as opposed to the commonly used continues approach.
methodsEvaluation was performed on human non-embalmed, fresh cadaver pelves. A total of 33 trials was performed. Eight female pelves with an average age of 75, were used. This resulted in 16 available ligaments. Recorded parameters were ultimate load, displacement at failure and stiffness.
resultsThe ultimate load for the mesh + simplified single "interrupted" suture (MIS) group was 35 (± 12) N and 48 (± 7) N for the mesh + continuous suture (MCS) group. There was no significant difference in the ultimate load between both groups (p> 0.05). This was also true for displacement at failure measured at 37 (± 12) mm and 36 (±5) mm respectively. There was also no significant difference in stiffness and failure modes.
conclusionGiven the data above we must conclude that a continuous suture is not necessary in laparoscopic mesh / ileo-pectineal ligament fixation during pectopexy. Ultimate load and displacement at failure results clearly indicate that a single suture is not inferior to a continuous approach. The use of two single sutures may improve ligamental fixation. However, overall stability should not benefit since the surgical mesh remains the limiting factor.
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.