ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2020
Time-frame comparison of hystero-preservation in the surgical treatment of uterine prolapse: a population-based nation-wide follow-up descriptive study, 2006-2013 versus 1997-2005.
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 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Uterine Prolapse Across the Female Lifespan: Clinical Insights and Practical Considerations from Greece.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
- The Pros and Cons of Hystero-preservation on Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe purpose of our study was to describe the surgical trend and time-frame comparison between 1997-2005 (1
methodsWomen, who underwent primary surgeries for uterine prolapse, either uterine suspension with hystero-preservation or hysterectomy during 1997-2013, were identified from National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD).We analyzed the related variables including surgical types (hystero-preservation or hysterectomy), patient age and concomitant anti-incontinence surgery, surgeon age, gender, and service volume; and hospital accreditation level, and service volume.
resultsWe identified a total of 46,968 inpatients, 6629 (14.11%) hystero-preservation group, and 40,339 (85.89%) hysterectomy group. Hystero-preservation significantly increased during the 17 year follow-up study period (1997 to 2013) (P value =0.0147). The overall surgeries for uterine prolapse increased among patients ≥70 years, with concomitant anti-incontinence surgery, surgeons ≥45 years, high volume surgeons, and hospitals. Multiple logistic regression revealed hysterectomy was less used in 2nd period (OR 0.45, 95%, confidence interval (CI) 0.43-0.48). Hysterectomy was more often used in patient aged ≥50 years, surgeon aged ≥45 years, and low volume hospitals. In case of concomitant anti-incontinence surgery (OR 0.48, CI 0.45-0.52), high volume surgeons (more than 30 surgeries) and hospitals (more than 73 surgeries) hystero-preservation was more often used.
conclusionsTime-frames, younger patients, concomitant anti-incontinence surgery, younger surgeons, and high volume surgeons and hospitals increase hystero-preservation for uterine prolapse. Surgeons and hospitals should be ready to respond to the wishes of female patients who want to preserve the uterus.
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.