Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27615439›Full record

Observational studyAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2017

Intraoperative cervix location and apical support stiffness in women with and without pelvic organ prolapse.

Carolyn W Swenson, Tovia M Smith, Jiajia Luo, Giselle E Kolenic, James A Ashton-Miller, John O DeLancey

Open access · greenAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. 2D ultrasound diagnosis of middle compartment prolapse: a multicenter study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2022
    Article
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Carolyn W SwensonDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. Electronic address: scarolyn@med.umich.edu.
Tovia M SmithDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Jiajia LuoDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Giselle E KolenicDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
James A Ashton-MillerDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
John O DeLanceyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
University of Michigan · US

Funding

Research Education CoreP30AG024824 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI Neil Alexander · 2004 to 2026
$29.2M
Which pelvic floor defects cause stress incontinence?P50HD044406 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI DELANCEY, JOHN O.L. · 2002 to 2017
$17.1M
University of Michigan WRHR Career Development ProgramK12HD065257 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI FENNER, DEE ELLEN · 2010 to 2019
$3.4M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG024824NICHD NIH HHS K12 HD065257NICHD NIH HHS P50 HD044406
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is unknown how initial cervix location and cervical support resistance to traction, which we term "apical support stiffness," compare in women with different patterns of pelvic organ support. Defining a normal range of apical support stiffness is important to better understand the pathophysiology of apical support loss.

objectiveThe aims of our study were to determine whether: (1) women with normal apical support on clinic Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification, but with vaginal wall prolapse (cystocele and/or rectocele), have the same intraoperative cervix location and apical support stiffness as women with normal pelvic support; and (2) all women with apical prolapse have abnormal intraoperative cervix location and apical support stiffness. A third objective was to identify clinical and biomechanical factors independently associated with clinic Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification point C. STUDY

designWe conducted an observational study of women with a full spectrum of pelvic organ support scheduled to undergo gynecologic surgery. All women underwent a preoperative clinic examination, including Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification. Cervix starting location and the resistance (stiffness) of its supports to being moved steadily in the direction of a traction force that increased from 0-18 N was measured intraoperatively using a computer-controlled servoactuator device. Women were divided into 3 groups for analysis according to their pelvic support as classified using the clinic Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification: (1) "normal/normal" was women with normal apical (C < -5 cm) and vaginal (Ba and Bp < 0 cm) support; (2) normal/prolapse had normal apical support (C < -5 cm) but prolapse of the anterior or posterior vaginal walls (Ba and/or Bp ≥ 0 cm); and (3) prolapse/prolapse had both apical and vaginal wall prolapse (C > -5 cm and Ba and/or Bp ≥ 0 cm). Demographics, intraoperative cervix locations, and apical support stiffness values were then compared. Normal range of cervix location during clinic examination and operative testing was defined by the total range of values observed in the normal/normal group. The proportion of women in each group with cervix locations within and outside the normal range was determined. Linear regression was performed to identify variables independently associated with clinic Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification point C.

resultsIn all, 52 women were included: 14 in the normal/normal group, 11 in the normal/prolapse group, and 27 in the prolapse/prolapse group. At 1 N of traction force in the operating room, 50% of women in the normal/prolapse group had cervix locations outside the normal range while 10% had apical support stiffness outside the normal range. Of women in the prolapse/prolapse group, 81% had cervix locations outside the normal range and 8% had apical support stiffness outside the normal range. Similar results for cervix locations were observed at 18 N of traction force; however the proportion of women with apical support stiffness outside the normal range increased to 50% in the normal/prolapse group and 59% in the prolapse/prolapse group. The prolapse/prolapse group had statistically lower apical support stiffness compared to the normal/normal group with increased traction from 1-18 N (0.47 ± 0.18 N/mm vs 0.63 ± 0.20 N/mm, P = .006), but all other comparisons were nonsignificant. After controlling for age, parity, body mass index, and apical support stiffness, cervix location at 1 N traction force remained an independent predictor of clinic Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification point C, but only in the prolapse/prolapse group.

conclusionApproximately 50% of women with cystocele and/or rectocele but normal apical support in the clinic had cervix locations outside the normal range under intraoperative traction, while 19% of women with uterine prolapse had normal apical support. Identifying women whose apical support falls outside a defined normal range may be a more accurate way to identify those who truly need a hysterectomy and/or an apical support procedure and to spare those who do not.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCase-Control StudiesCervix UteriCystoceleFemaleHumansIntraoperative PeriodMiddle AgedPelvic Organ ProlapseRectoceleUterine Prolapseapical support stiffnesscervix locationprolapse

Identifiers

PMID27615439
PMCPMC5290121
OpenAlexW2520903916

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.