ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2020
The resurrection of sacrospinous fixation: unilateral apical sling hysteropexy.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Post-Hysterectomy Vaginal Vault Prolapse: Current Perspectives and Decision-Making Considerations for Surgical Treatment.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Article
- Anterior bilateral sacrospinous ligament fixation with concomitant anterior native tissue repair: a pilot study.International urogynecology journal · 2022Review
- The Vaginal Patch Plastron Associated to the Anterior Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation for the Treatment of Advanced Anterior Vaginal Wall Prolapse.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Bilateral Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Bilateral Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation with Vaginal Hysterectomy for Apical Uterovaginal Prolapse.International neurourology journal · 2022Article
- Sacrospinous ligament fixation: medium and long-term anatomical results, functional and quality of life results.BMC women's health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe apical compartment is a keystone in POP treatment. Sacrospinous fixation, suggested half a century ago, today is still one of the most popular and efficient methods of colpo-hysteropexy. However, it has specific side effects: chronic pain syndrome, dyspareunia and а high rate of cystocele de novo. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of unilateral sacrospinous hysteropexy with a synthetic apical sling combined with anterior subfascial colporrhaphy.
methodsFollowing the suggested technique, 174 women with anterior-apical prolapse underwent surgery. The follow-up period took 12 months. Pre- and postoperative examination included: urogynecological examination (POP-Q), uroflowmetry, ultrasound of the bladder and filling in of validated questionnaires (PFDI-20, PISQ-12).
resultsThe mean surgery time was 26 ± 7.84 min. No cases of damage of the bladder or rectum or of intraoperative clinically significant bleeding were noted. At the 12-month follow-up, the recurrence rate in the apical compartment was 0.7% (1/147) and in the anterior compartment 7.4% (11/147). The efficacy of the surgery reached 96.5%. During 12 months of follow-up, no cases of mesh exposure or chronic pelvic pain syndrome were detected. The incidence of dyspareunia de novo was observed in just one patient.
conclusionsA unilateral sacrospinous fixation with a synthetic mesh (apical sling) combined with anterior subfascial colporrhaphy enhances the anatomical efficacy of surgery. It also helps to avoid specific side effects of traditional sacrospinous fixation.
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.