ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2019
Computed-tomography image segmentation and 3D-reconstruction of the female pelvis for the preoperative planning of sacrocolpopexy: preliminary data.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep learning accurately and reliably segments pelvic vascular structure in CT scans of gynecologic cancer patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Exploration of the safe suture area of the presacral space in sacrocolpopexy by 3-dimensional (3D) models reconstructed from CT.International urogynecology journal · 2021Article
- 3D modeling and 3D printing in functional urology: the future perspective.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- Measures for Safe Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy: Preoperative Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography and Perioperative Ultrasonography.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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally-invasive sacrocolpopexy is the gold standard procedure for advanced apical prolapse. Nonetheless, sacrocolpopexy has potential serious complications leading many surgeons to avoid this excellent surgical procedure. To overcome these limitations, preoperative planning with 3D models of the female pelvis is proposed. The aim of the study is to evaluate the feasibility of pelvic anatomy reconstruction with the ITK-SNAP software and highlight its potential benefits in this intervention.
methodsThirty patient-specific 3D models of the female pelvis were created using ITK-SNAP and the EndoCAS Segmentation Pipeline extension for image segmentation: contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) data sets of women who underwent examinations for reasons other than prolapse were used. The distances of pelvic structures from the sacral promontory were standardised and measured, and correlations among these distances were evaluated with Spearman's correlation coefficient.
resultsPelvic anatomy reconstruction was feasible for all CE-CT data sets. A statistically significant correlation was found between the distances of the cava bifurcation and common iliac vessels from the sacral promontory. An area for proximal mesh attachment was defined: it is free from the passage of iliac vessels in 97.5% of cases. A significant statistical correlation was found between the distances of the midpoint of the bispinous diameter and the uterine cervix from the sacral promontory; a process of linear regression showed that the latter measure can be estimated by multiplying the first one by 0.86.
conclusionsPre-surgical 3D reconstructions of the female pelvis using ITK-SNAP could help achieve widespread use of sacrocolpopexy: further comparative studies are needed to evaluate the outcomes with and without their use.
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.