SynthesisInternational urogynecology journal2017
Sacrospinous hysteropexy: review and meta-analysis of outcomes.
Synthesis in International urogynecology journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effects of various therapies on vulvovaginal atrophy and quality of life in gynecological cancer patients: a systematic review.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- A Retrospective Cohort Study of Bilateral Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation Over a Decade of Clinical Experience.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation for Hysteropexy: Does Concomitant Anterior and Posterior Fixation Using a Posterior Approach Route Improve Surgical Outcomes?International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Letter to "Patient Impression of Improvement 1 year After Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy in Women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Stage 2 or Higher".International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- The Outcomes of the Manchester Procedure Versus Sacrospinous Ligament Hysteropexy for Uterine Prolapse: A Study of the British Society of Urogynaecology Database.International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- Anterior approach sacrospinous hysteropexy: native tissue compared with mesh-augmented repair for primary uterovaginal prolapse management.International urogynecology journal · 2023Article
- Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Prolapse Hysterectomy with Apical Fixation: A Retrospective Comparison over an 18 Year Period.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Anterior bilateral sacrospinous ligament fixation with concomitant anterior native tissue repair: a pilot study.International urogynecology journal · 2022Review
- Bilateral Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Bilateral Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation with Vaginal Hysterectomy for Apical Uterovaginal Prolapse.International neurourology journal · 2022Article
- A novel bilateral anterior sacrospinous hysteropexy technique for apical pelvic organ prolapse repair via the vaginal route: a cohort study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022Article
- Recurrent surgery in uterine prolapse: A nationwide register study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2022Article
- Native tissue sacrospinous hysteropexy from an anterior approach.International urogynecology journal · 2021Review
- Short-term outcomes of anterior approach sacrospinous ligament fixation for apical vaginal prolapse - A retrospective study.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2021Article
- Short-term outcomes of sacrospinous hysteropexy through an anterior approach.International urogynecology journal · 2021Article
- The resurrection of sacrospinous fixation: unilateral apical sling hysteropexy.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- Sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: observational follow-up of a multicentre randomised trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2019Observational
- Article
- Revisiting current treatment options for stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse: a contemporary literature review.Research and reports in urology · 2019Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSacrospinous hysteropexy is a uterine-preserving procedure for treatment of apical prolapse. We present a literature review evaluating the sacrospinous hysteropexy procedure and its current place in the surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse. Additionally, to assess the efficacy of the procedure, we performed a meta-analysis of studies comparing sacrospinous hysteropexy to vaginal hysterectomy and repair in terms of anatomical outcomes, complications, and repeat surgery.
methodsMajor literature databases including MEDLINE (1946 to 2 April 2016), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 3), and Embase (1947 to 2 April 2016) were searched for relevant studies. We used Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager software to perform meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies and observational studies.
resultsVaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy was first performed in 1989 and is similar in technique to sacrospinous colpopexy. Two randomized controlled trials and four cohort studies (n = 651) were included in the meta-analysis. Apical failure rates after sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy were not significantly different, although the trend favored vaginal hysterectomy [odds ratio (OR) 2.08; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-5.68]. Rates of repeat surgery for prolapse were not significantly different between the two groups (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.41-2.37). The most significant disadvantage of uterine-preservation prolapse surgery when compared with hysterectomy is the lack of prevention and diagnosis of uterine malignancy.
conclusionSacrospinous hysteropexy is a safe and effective procedure for pelvic organ prolapse and has comparable outcomes to vaginal hysterectomy with repair.
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.