Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30789385›Full record

SynthesisJournal of lower genital tract disease2019

The Clinical Role of LASER for Vulvar and Vaginal Treatments in Gynecology and Female Urology: An ICS/ISSVD Best Practice Consensus Document.

Mario Preti, Pedro Vieira-Baptista, Giuseppe Alessandro Digesu, Carol Emi Bretschneider, Margot Damaser, Oktay Demirkesen, Debra S Heller, Naside Mangir, Claudia Marchitelli, Sherif Mourad and 6 more

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic ReviewConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of lower genital tract disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Let's talk about sex: consensus guidelines of the GINECOR working group of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology: clinical recommendations after pelvic radiotherapy.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Fractional COInternational urogynecology journal · 2023
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Observational
  9. The Efficacy of COJournal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The Fractional COLasers in surgery and medicine · 2021
    Article
  15. The Effect of the COJournal of lasers in medical sciences · 2020
    Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 13 institutions in 7 countries.

Mario PretiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Torino, Torino, Italy.
Pedro Vieira-BaptistaHospital Lusíadas Porto.
Giuseppe Alessandro DigesuImperial College Healthcare, Department of Urogynaecology, London, UK.
Carol Emi BretschneiderCenter for Urogynecology and Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery, Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic.
Margot DamaserCenter for Urogynecology and Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery, Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic.
Oktay DemirkesenIstanbul University Cerrahpaşa Faculty of Medicine, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey.
Debra S HellerDepartment of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, Rutgers-New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ.
Naside MangirKroto Research Institute, Department of Material Science and Engineering, University of Sheffield.
Claudia MarchitelliDepartment of Gynecology, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Sherif MouradAin Shams University, Department of Urology, Cairo, Egypt.
Micheline Moyal-BarraccoDepartment of Dermatology, Hôpital Tarnier-Cochin, Paris, France.
Sol PeremateuDepartment of Gynecology, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Visha TailorImperial College Healthcare, Department of Urogynaecology, London, UK.
Tufan TarcanMarmara University School of Medicine, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey.
Elise J B DeDepartment of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital-Harvard Medical School Boston, MA.
Colleen K StockdaleDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.
Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires · ARImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GBAin Shams University · EGCleveland Clinic · USCleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine · USHarvard University · USIstanbul University-Cerrahpaşa · TRLusíada University of Porto · PTMarmara University · TRRoyal Hallamshire Hospital · GBRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · USUniversity of Iowa · USUniversity of Turin · IT

Funding

ORD VA F9261-L
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this best practice document, we propose recommendations for the use of LASER for gynecologic and urologic conditions such as vulvovaginal atrophy, urinary incontinence, vulvodynia, and lichen sclerosus based on a thorough literature review. Most of the available studies are limited by their design; for example, they lack a control group, patients are not randomized, follow-up is short term, series are small, LASER is not compared with standard treatments, and most studies are industry sponsored. Because of these limitations, the level of evidence for the use of LASER in the treatment of these conditions remains low and does not allow for definitive recommendations for its use in routine clinical practice. Histological evidence is commonly reported as proof of tissue regeneration after LASER treatment. However, the histological changes noted can also be consistent with reparative changes after a thermal injury rather than necessarily representing regeneration or restoration of function. The use of LASER in women with vulvodynia or lichen sclerosus should not be recommended in routine clinical practice. There is no biological plausibility or safety data on its use on this population of women. The available clinical studies do not present convincing data regarding the efficacy of LASER for the treatment of vaginal atrophy or urinary incontinence. Also, although short-term complications seem to be uncommon, data concerning long-term outcomes are lacking. Therefore, at this point, LASER is not recommended for routine treatment of the aforementioned conditions unless part of well-designed clinical trials or with special arrangements for clinical governance, consent, and audit.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultChildFemaleHumansLaser TherapyMiddle AgedPractice Guidelines as TopicVaginal DiseasesVulvar DiseasesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30789385
PMCPMC6462818
OpenAlexW2917120283

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.