ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2020
Long-term mesh complications and reoperation after laparoscopic mesh sacrohysteropexy: a cross-sectional study.
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 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of Mesh-Related Complications Following Uterovaginal Prolapse Repair: A Systematic Review.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Clinical Comparison of Sacrohysteropexy and Uterosacral Ligament Suspension in Uterovaginal Prolapse Repair: A Randomized Clinical Trial.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Patient-Reported Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of the pelvic organ prolapse and vaginal prolapse among the global population.BJUI compass · 2025Review
- Pilsner Modification of Mesh Sacrohysterocolpopexy (PiMMS): An Initial Report on Safety and Efficacy.International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- Determinants of Dissatisfaction After Laparoscopic Cure of Vaginal and/or Rectal Prolapse using Mesh: a Comprehensive Retrospective Cohort Study.International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- Laparoscopic Sacrohysteropexy for the Management of Uterovaginal Prolapse: a Pilot, Single-Center Experience from Saudi Arabia.International journal of women's health · 2024Article
- Laparoscopic suture sacrohysteropexy: A meshless uterine- sparing technique for surgical management of uterine prolapse.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2023Article
- Laparoscopic synthetic mesh explantation after sacrohysteropexy.International urogynecology journal · 2022Article
- Satisfactory medium-long term patient reported outcomes after laparoscopic single-mesh sacrohysteropexy.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2022Article
- Host-biomaterial interactions in mesh complications after pelvic floor reconstructive surgery.Nature reviews. Urology · 2021Review
- Prospective International Multicenter Pelvic Floor Study: Short-Term Follow-Up and Clinical Findings for Combined Pectopexy and Native Tissue Repair.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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe paucity of long-term safety and efficacy data to support laparoscopic mesh sacrohysteropexy is noteworthy given concerns about the use of polypropylene mesh in pelvic floor surgery. This study is aimed at determining the incidence of mesh-associated complications and reoperation following this procedure.
methodsThis was a cross-sectional postal questionnaire study of women who underwent laparoscopic mesh sacrohysteropexy between 2010 and 2018. Potential participants were identified from surgical databases of five surgeons at two tertiary urogynaecology centres in the UK. The primary outcome was patient-reported mesh complication requiring removal of hysteropexy mesh. Secondary outcomes included other mesh-associated complications, reoperation rates and Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) in prolapse symptoms. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were used.
resultsOf 1,766 eligible participants, 1,121 women responded (response proportion 63.5%), at a median follow-up of 46 months. The incidence of mesh complications requiring removal of hysteropexy mesh was 0.4% (4 out of 1,121). The rate of chronic pain service use was 1.8%, and newly diagnosed systemic autoimmune disorders was 5.8%. The rate of reoperation for apical prolapse was 3.7%, and for any form of pelvic organ prolapse it was 13.6%. For PGI-I, 81.4% of patients were "much better" or "very much better".
conclusionsLaparoscopic mesh sacrohysteropexy has a low incidence of reoperation for mesh complications and apical prolapse, and a high rate of patient-reported improvement in prolapse symptoms. With appropriate clinical governance measures, the procedure offers an alternative to vaginal hysterectomy with apical suspension. However, long-term comparative studies are still required.
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.