ArticleTherapeutic advances in urology
Robotic sacrocolpopexy for the management of pelvic organ prolapse: quality of life outcomes.
Article in Therapeutic advances in urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of Le Fort colpocleisis in the treatment of stage III-IV pelvic organ prolapse.BMC women's health · 2024Article
- Role of Preoperative and Postoperative Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 in Evaluation of Posthysterectomy Vault Prolapse.Journal of mid-life healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOur aim was to investigate longer-term surgical and quality of life (QOL) outcomes in a cohort of women undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (RALS) for pelvic organ prolapse (POP).
methodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study at a single institution of female patients undergoing RALS with and without concomitant robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy, urethral sling, and rectocele repair. Scores from the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ) surveys were used to evaluate QOL outcomes. Clinical improvement was defined by a decrease in a patient's PFDI and PFIQ postoperative score by ⩾70%.
resultsClinical improvement was seen in 62.6% by the PFIQ and in 64% by the PFDI survey. Younger patient age (OR 0.92,
conclusionsSignificantly fewer patients reached clinical improvement within the portions of the surveys that focus on bowel symptoms, compared with symptoms related to urination and POP. Of those that had a concomitant rectocele repair, approximately half reached clinical improvement with their bowel symptoms.
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.