ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2020
Long-term follow-up of native tissue anterior vaginal wall repair: does the POP-Q stage really reflect patients' satisfaction rate?
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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Five-year surgical outcomes of transvaginal apical approaches in women with advanced pelvic organ prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2023Trial
- Prospective Comparative Study of EMSella Therapy and Surgical Anterior Colporrhaphy for Urinary Incontinence: Outcomes and Efficacy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAnterior colporrhaphy (AC) is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures for pelvic organ prolapse treatment; however, there are only few data in the literature regarding its long-term outcomes. Our aim was to assess the long-term efficacy and satisfaction rate after AC.
methodsPatients who underwent AC at our institution from 2011 to 2014 were invited to this follow-up study, which took place in January-February 2019. Medical history and gynaecological examination with POP-Q assessment were performed. Patients filled out validated questionnaires UIQ-7, CRAIQ-7, POPIQ-7, PFIQ-7, POPDI-6, CRADI-8, and UDI-6 and evaluated their satisfaction with the procedure. Objective success was defined as anterior wall prolapse stage 0 or 1 assessed by the POP-Q system. Subjective success was defined as the absence of bulging sensation or a sense of falling out that can be felt or seen in the vaginal area. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests.
resultsSeventy out of 137 (51.1%) patients attended the follow-up. Mean follow-up period up was 74.1 ± 12.6 months. Two patients were excluded from the analysis because they had another surgical procedure due to central compartment prolapse. Of the remaining patients, 50 had AC and 18 had AC and posterior colporrhaphy (PC). Objective success rate was 13.2% and subjective success rate was 68.7%. Almost all patients (98.5%) were satisfied with the procedure. In the group of patients with objective recurrence, 66.1% had no prolapse symptoms.
conclusionDespite having a low objective success rate, patients' satisfaction with AC is very high.
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.