ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2020
Long-term pelvic organ prolapse recurrence and mesh exposure following sacrocolpopexy.
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 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopic Versus Robot-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review and bibliometric analysis of robot vs. laparoscopic surgery in urogynecology: current trends and future directions.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Mesh Exposure After Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy with Concomitant Total Hysterectomy or Uterine Preservation: A Retrospective Cohort Study.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Prolapse recurrence, methods of reoperation, and long-term mesh complications-A nationwide follow-up study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Unilateral pectineal suspension with mesh as a rescue procedure when sacrocolpopexy is not feasible: a case series.Journal of surgical case reports · 2026Article
- Complication Rates are Low for Women Aged 70 and Older Undergoing Sacrocolpopexy.International urogynecology journal · 2025Article
- Exosome injection as a prevention strategy for early postoperative mesh complications in a porcine model of sacrocolpopexy.NPJ Regenerative medicine · 2025Article
- Sacrocolpopexy: The Way I Do It.International urogynecology journal · 2024Review
- Recurrent Pelvic Organ Prolapse after Sacrocolpopexy-A Surgical Challenge.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Robotic sacrocolpopexy.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2024Article
- Innovative vaginal manipulator technique vs. traditional method for vaginal fornix deployment in robotic sacrocolpopexy.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Article
- Outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2023Article
- The Outcome of Sacrocolpopexy/Sacrohysteropexy for Patients with Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Predictors of Anatomical Failure.International journal of women's health · 2023Article
- Mesh exposure following minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: a narrative review.International urogynecology journal · 2022Review
- Comparison of first versus second line sacrocolpopexies in terms of morbidity and mid-term efficacy.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Long term outcomes of laparoscopic sacro/colpo-hysteropexy with and without rectopexy for the treatment of prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2022Article
- New "Wrinkle Method" for Intracorporeal Anterior Vaginal Wall Plication during Sacrocolpopexy.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisLarge, long-term studies are needed to compare pelvic organ prolapse (POP) recurrence and mesh exposure following all modes of sacrocolpopexy (open, robotic, and laparoscopic). We hypothesized that the prevalence of recurrent POP and mesh exposure does not differ between modes of sacrocolpopexy.
methodsThis is a retrospective cohort study with a cross-sectional, prospective survey. Participants were surveyed regarding complications, retreatments, and symptoms following sacrocolpopexy. Baseline characteristics, POP recurrence, mesh exposure, and survey responses were compared.
resultsA total of 709 participants met the criteria. Median time from sacrocolpopexy to last follow-up for all participants was 0.5 years (2 days to 13.4 years). 15.0% experienced recurrent stage 2 or greater POP or underwent retreatment (open 11.7% [95% CI 7.8-17.2%]; robotic 21.1% [95% CI 15.6-27.9%]; laparoscopic 13.8% [95% CI 10.6-17.9%]; p = 0.03). After adjusting for baseline differences there was no significant difference among groups (p = 0.30). 5.3% experienced mesh and/or suture exposure (mesh n = 19, suture n = 10, mesh and suture n = 8) with no significant difference among groups (open 7.7% [95% CI 4.6-12.5%]; robotic 3.6% [95% CI 1.7-7.6%]; laparoscopic 4.9% [95% CI 3.1-7.7%]; p = 0.20). Median time from sacrocolpopexy to survey completion was 6.5 (1.6-13.4) years. 9.2% reported evaluation or treatment for recurrent POP (open 6.3% [95% CI 2.1-16.8%]; robotic 12.5% [95% CI 6.9-21.5%]; laparoscopic 8.5% [5.1-13.8%]; p = 0.44). 6.9% reported evaluation or treatment for mesh exposure (open 6.0% [95% CI 2.1-16.2%]; robotic 3.9% [95% CI 1.3-10.7%]; laparoscopic 8.6% [5.2-13.9%]; p = 0.38).
conclusionsObjective and patient-reported long-term prevalence of POP recurrence and mesh exposure are low following all modes of sacrocolpopexy.
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.