Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33471144›Full record

Trial reportInternational urogynecology journal2021

A prospective randomized trial comparing Restorelle® Y mesh and flat mesh for laparoscopic and robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: 24-month outcomes.

Cecile A Ferrando, Marie Fidela R Paraiso

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in International urogynecology journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Cecile A FerrandoCenter for Urogynecology & Reconstructive Surgery, Subspecialty Care for Women's Health, Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. ferranc2@ccf.org.
Marie Fidela R ParaisoCenter for Urogynecology & Reconstructive Surgery, Subspecialty Care for Women's Health, Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Cleveland Clinic · USWomen’s Health Care · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare prolapse recurrence and the incidence of mesh exposure between Restorelle® Y mesh and dual flat mesh.

methodsA randomized trial of women undergoing laparoscopic (LSC) or robotic (RSC) sacrocolpopexy for post-hysterectomy vaginal prolapse. Subjects were randomized to either Y mesh or dual flat mesh. Subjects underwent a pelvic examination with POP-Q and evaluation of any mesh exposure, and the PFDI-20 was administered at 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. Subjective recurrence was defined by symptomatic vaginal bulge. All subjects underwent pelvic examination with POP-Q at 6, 12 and 24 months. Objective recurrence was defined by descent of the apex > 1/3 into the vaginal canal, anterior or posterior vaginal descent beyond the hymen, or retreatment for prolapse.

resultsSixty-two patients were enrolled, and 59 patients were implanted with mesh: 30 Y mesh (17 LSC, 13 RSC) and 29 flat mesh (18 LSC, 11 RSC). There were no differences in patient characteristics between the groups. At 24 months, data were available for 44 (74.5%) patients. There were no mesh exposures for all subjects. PFDI-20 scores improved significantly for all subjects with no differences in mean improvement by mesh configuration. There were no differences in subjective and objective recurrence rates between the groups. Four patients (9.1%) complained of subjective vaginal bulge symptoms while nine (20.5%) patients had an objective recurrence (77.8% [7] examination only and 22.2% [2] reoperation). There were no apical recurrences. Of those patients who had a recurrence on examination only (n = 7), 85.7% (6) were asymptomatic.

conclusionsAt 24 months, there were no differences in subjective outcomes and prolapse recurrence in patients who underwent sacrocolpopexy with the Restorelle® Y mesh versus dual flat mesh. One in five patients experienced an objective recurrence; however, there were no apical recurrences and the majority were asymptomatic.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyPelvic Organ ProlapseRobotic Surgical ProceduresFemaleGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansProspective StudiesSurgical MeshTreatment OutcomeMesh exposureProlapse recurrenceSacrocolpopexy

Identifiers

PMID33471144
OpenAlexW3123044665

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.