ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2016
Laparoscopic wrap round mesh sacrohysteropexy for the management of apical prolapse.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Uterine-preserving surgeries for the repair of pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review with meta-analysis and clinical practice guidelines.International urogynecology journal · 2019Pooled it
- Laparoscopic Hysteropexy: How, When and for Whom Is It an Alternative Option? A Narrative Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of the pelvic organ prolapse and vaginal prolapse among the global population.BJUI compass · 2025Review
- Midterm comparison of laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of moderate to severe apical prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2023Article
- Laparoscopic suture sacrohysteropexy: A meshless uterine- sparing technique for surgical management of uterine prolapse.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2023Article
- Mesh exposure following minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: a narrative review.International urogynecology journal · 2022Review
- Satisfactory medium-long term patient reported outcomes after laparoscopic single-mesh sacrohysteropexy.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2022Article
- Long-term mesh complications and reoperation after laparoscopic mesh sacrohysteropexy: a cross-sectional study.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- Laparoscopic hysteropexy: 10 years' experience.International urogynecology journal · 2017Article
- Long-term safety and efficacy of non-absorbable abdominal mesh for apical prolapse surgery: A 10-year experience at Tertiary Care Hospital.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisInterest in uterine-conserving surgery for apical prolapse is growing. Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy is one of the conservative surgical options, although different surgical approaches have been described. We report medium-term outcome data using a bifurcated mesh implant, employing 'wrap round' uterine attachment.
methodsAll procedures undertaken at our unit were reviewed. Study inclusion was contingent on the collection of baseline and 3-month anatomical and symptomatic outcome data. Medium-term follow-up data were collected by telephone review. Anatomical outcome was reported using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification scale. Symptom prevalence and treatment response were assessed using validated instruments including the Patient Global Impression of Improvement scale (PGI-I), and the International Consultation on Incontinence Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UI) and Vaginal Symptoms (ICIQ-VS) questionnaires. Patient satisfaction was reported using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.
resultsData were available for 110 patients. Of 80 patients providing PGI-I data at 3 months, 75 (94 %) described their prolapse symptoms as 'much better' or 'very much better'. Anatomical success in the apical compartment was 98 %. ICIQ-UI and ICIQ-VS responses demonstrated significant improvement. Despite a concurrent vaginal repair in only 11 % of patients, satisfaction at a mean follow-up of 2.6 years was 96 %. Repeat surgery for vaginal wall prolapse was required in only 5 % of patients. No safety concerns or graft complications were recorded.
conclusionsThis surgical variant of laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy is safe and highly effective. These data also cast doubt on the need for correction of modest vaginal wall prolapse at the time of surgery, and imply that apical prolapse may play a dominant role in the generation of symptoms.
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.