ArticleFemale pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery
Symptom Relief and Retreatment After Vaginal, Open, or Robotic Surgery for Apical Vaginal Prolapse.
Article in Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Safety of Robot-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Treatment: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International urogynecology journal · 2025Pooled it
- Long-Term Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Six Surgical Procedures for Apical Suspension.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- From Mesh to Modern Therapies: An Updated Narrative Review on Urogenital Prolapse.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Long-term pelvic organ prolapse recurrence and mesh exposure following sacrocolpopexy.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- Robotic-assisted repair of pelvic organ prolapse: a scoping review of the literature.Translational andrology and urology · 2020Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this work was to determine the degree of symptom relief and survival free of retreatment after Mayo-McCall culdoplasty (MMC), open abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC), and robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) for posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse.
methodsWe retrospectively studied patients who had undergone surgery for posthysterectomy apical vaginal prolapse from January 1, 2000, through June 30, 2012, at our institution. Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes were abstracted from electronic health records. Cross-sectional data for current pelvic floor symptoms were collected by using validated questionnaires. Survival free of retreatment was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. To account for selection bias, adjusted analyses using inverse probability weighting (IPW) were performed to compare outcomes for MMC versus ASC, MMC versus RSC, and ASC versus RSC.
resultsOf 512 patients, 337 completed at least a validated or abbreviated questionnaire. Among MMC, ASC, and RSC groups, overall Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20, Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire Short Form 7, and Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire 12 summary scores were not significantly different. There was no significant difference in 5-year survival free of retreatment for MMC (94.0%) versus RSC (95.5%) and ASC (94.8%) versus RSC (92.1%). However, patients who had MMC were more likely to have retreatment than patients who had ASC during the first 10 years (10-year survival free of retreatment: 81.1% vs 95.4%; hazard ratio, 3.68 [95% confidence interval, 1.51-8.98]); the 10-year data were not available for RSC comparisons, given the later initiation of RSC.
conclusionsSymptom relief was comparable after MMC, ASC, and RSC. Among all groups, most patients were free of retreatment for prolapse at 5 years. Between the MMC and ASC groups, survival free of retreatment (%) within 10 years was still favorable, but ASC had greater durability, particularly after accounting for selection bias.
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.