ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2020
Perioperative outcomes after robotic versus vaginal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Safety of Robot-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Treatment: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International urogynecology journal · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objectives of the study were to compare post-anesthesia care unit opioid use and pain scores, surgical and hospitalization times, and perioperative adverse events rates following robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) versus transvaginal uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS). This was a retrospective analysis of women 18 years and older who underwent either robotic sacrocolpopexy (n = 87) or transvaginal uterosacral ligament suspension (n = 103) between January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2017 at Downey Medical Center by two surgeons. Data including nurses' verbal pain scores and opioid use were abstracted from electronic medical records. Adverse events were classified using the Clavien-Dindo scale. Women in the robotic group were older (62 ± 8 years vs 58 ± 11 years, p = 0.005), had higher rate of stage III or IV prolapse [49/87 (56%) vs 15/103 (15%), p < 0.0002], lower postoperative pain scores (2.6 ± 1.8 vs 4.2 ± 2.4, p < 0.0001), and used less opioids (26 ± 17 mg morphine dose equivalent vs 35 ± 24 mg morphine dose equivalent, p = 0.005) than those in the transvaginal group. Readmissions and reoperations for adverse events were not significantly different between the RSC and USLS groups [5/87 (6%) vs 12/103 (12%), p = 0.16], respectively. Moreover, Dindo-Clavien scores of II or higher occurred at similar rates between the two groups [20/87 (23%) vs 26/103 (25%), p = 0.72]. However, patients had a higher rate of prolonged urethral catheterization following USLS (0/87) than RSC (6/103) (p = 0.03). Robotic sacrocolpopexy was associated with less immediate postoperative pain and opioid use compared to uterosacral ligament vaginal suspension.
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.