ArticleFemale pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery2021
Predictive Value of Biomechanical Mapping for Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery.
Article in Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Significance of Textile Properties for the Design of a New Pelvic Implant to Treat Pelvic Organ Prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2025Review
- Digital Twin of the Female Pelvic Floor.Open journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2024Article
- Impact of preoperative pelvic floor muscle function on the success of surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2024Observational
- Analysis of the anatomical and biomechanical characteristics of the pelvic floor in cystocele.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2023Observational
- Correlation between the female pelvic floor biomechanical parameters and the severity of stress urinary incontinence.BMC urology · 2023Article
- Vaginal tactile imaging: A review.Pelviperineology · 2023Article
- Tactile and Ultrasound Image Fusion for Functional Assessment of the Female Pelvic Floor.Open journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study examined biomechanical changes in pelvic floor after urogynecological surgery.
methodsThis multisite clinical study was designed to explore changes in tissue elasticity, pelvic support, and certain functions (contractive strength, muscle relaxation speed, muscle motility) after pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery. A biomechanical mapping of the pelvic floor was performed before and 4 to 6 months after the surgery. The biomechanical data for 52 parameters were acquired by vaginal tactile imaging for manually applied deflection pressures to vaginal walls and pelvic muscle contractions. The two-sample t-test (P < 0.05) was used to test the null hypothesis that presurgery data in group 1 (positive parameter change after surgery) and presurgery data in group 2 (negative parameter change after surgery) belonged to the same distribution.
resultsA total of 78 subjects with 255 surgical procedures were analyzed across 5 participating clinical sites. All 52 t-tests for group 1 versus group 2 had P value in the range from 4.0 × 10-10 to 4.3 × 10-2 associating all of the 52 parameter changes after surgery with the presurgical conditions. The P value of before and after surgery correlation ranged from 3.7 × 10-18 to 1.6 × 10-2 for 50 of 52 tests, with Pearson correlation coefficient ranging from -0.79 to -0.27. Thus, vaginal tactile imaging parameters strongly correlated weak pelvic floor presurgery with the positive POP surgery outcome of improved biomechanical properties.
conclusionsPelvic organ prolapse surgery, in general, improves the biomechanical conditions and integrity of the weak pelvic floor. The proposed biomechanical parameters can predict changes resulting from POP surgery.
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.