Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29987345›Full record

Trial reportInternational urogynecology journal2019

Anatomical outcomes 1 year after pelvic organ prolapse surgery in patients with and without a uterus at a high risk of recurrence: a randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy/cervicopexy and anterior vaginal mesh.

Eduardo Bataller, Cristina Ros, Sonia Anglès, Miriam Gallego, Montserrat Espuña-Pons, Francisco Carmona

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in International urogynecology journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT07194343 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Multicenter Study on Levator Ani Muscle Fixation in Laparoscopic Colposacropexy (FIMEA Multicenter Study)

TypeinterventionalSponsorFundació Institut de Recerca de l'Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant PauRan2022 to 2025Enrolled190ConditionsProlapse Genital, Prolapse Uterovaginal, Prolapse, FemaleArmsLaparoscopic colposacropexy with levator ani muscle mesh fixation, Simplified modification of laparoscopic colposacropexy
NCT07359755 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

A Comparative Analysis of Vaginal Mesh Surgery Versus Robotic-assisted Abdominal Mesh Surgery in the Treatment of Apical Genital Prolapse: a Prospective Randomized Non-inferiority Study.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Sao Paulo General HospitalRan2025 to 2030Enrolled86ConditionsPelvic Organ Prolapse (POP), Pelvic Organ Prolapse Vaginal Surgery, Mesh Reinforcement, Vaginal Apex/Uterine ProlapseArmsVaginal mesh surgery for apical prolapse, Robotic-assisted abdominal mesh surgery with Upsylon device (Boston Scientific - USA) for vaginal apical prolapse
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Sacrocolpopexy: The Way I Do It.International urogynecology journal · 2024
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. Urinary Incontinence and Pelvic Organ Prolapse in Women.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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.

Eduardo BatallerInstitut Clínic de Ginecologia, Obstetrícia i Neonatologia (ICGON), Hospital Clínic i Provincial de Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Cristina RosInstitut Clínic de Ginecologia, Obstetrícia i Neonatologia (ICGON), Hospital Clínic i Provincial de Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. cros@clinic.cat.
Sonia AnglèsInstitut Clínic de Ginecologia, Obstetrícia i Neonatologia (ICGON), Hospital Clínic i Provincial de Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Miriam GallegoInstitut Clínic de Ginecologia, Obstetrícia i Neonatologia (ICGON), Hospital Clínic i Provincial de Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Montserrat Espuña-PonsInstitut Clínic de Ginecologia, Obstetrícia i Neonatologia (ICGON), Hospital Clínic i Provincial de Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Francisco CarmonaInstitut Clínic de Ginecologia, Obstetrícia i Neonatologia (ICGON), Hospital Clínic i Provincial de Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introduction and hypothesisFew studies have compared the different approaches of mesh surgery in patients with severe pelvic organ prolapse (POP). In addition to laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy/cervicopexy (LSC-Cx), anterior vaginal mesh (AVM) may be an effective approach for correcting anterior vaginal wall associated with apical POP in women with advanced POP.

methodsA randomised controlled trial (RCT; January 2011 to March 2016) including 120 patients (60/group) with advanced symptomatic POP, with a predominant anterior vaginal wall descent stage III or greater in combination with a stage II or III apical defect (uterus or vaginal vault). Patients underwent four visits: baseline, 3, 6 and12 months after surgery. The main outcome was anatomical success defined as anterior and posterior vaginal wall not descending beyond the hymen and vaginal apex descent no more than one third into the vagina. Secondary variables: PFDI, ICIQ-UI-SF, intraoperative variables, postoperative morbidity and complications.

resultsAnatomical success was achieved with LSC-Cx in 79% and with AVM in 76% (NS). No statistically significant differences were found among POP-Q anterior vaginal wall points between groups, whereas better results were obtained with LSC-Cx in posterior vaginal wall points and total vaginal length. Intraoperative outcomes were similar in the two groups, except for operating time (78.05 min LSC-Cx vs 44.28 min AVM). There were no statistically significant differences related to de novo stress urinary incontinence and dyspareunia. Worse results were found in the CRADI-8 in the LSC-Cx group, owing to constipation. Late postoperative complications and reinterventions were similar in the two groups.

conclusionsNo differences were found in the anatomical correction of anterior and apical POP. The LSC-Cx group presented better correction of posterior vaginal wall defects and a longer total vaginal length.

Indexed as

LaparoscopySurgical MeshAgedCervix UteriDyspareuniaFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansMiddle AgedOperative TimeOrgan SizePelvic Organ ProlapseRecurrenceSacrumSeverity of Illness IndexAnterior vaginal meshLaparoscopic sacral colpopexy/cervicopexyMesh surgeryPelvic organ prolapseProlapse recurrence

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.