ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2021
Is robotic-assisted sacrocolpo(hystero)pexy safe and effective in women over 65 years of age?
Article 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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comment on "Evaluation of Robotic-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy Videos on YouTube".International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- The effect of advanced age on peri- and post-operative complications following pelvic floor repair surgeries.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Article
- Evaluation of robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy videos on YouTube.International urogynecology journal · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe objective was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted sacrocolpo(hystero)pexy in elderly patients with symptomatic apical pelvic organ prolapse and to compare the outcomes of open abdominal and robotic-assisted sacrocolpo(hystero)pexy in geriatric patients.
methodsElderly patients (≥65 years of age) who underwent open abdominal or robotic-assisted sacrocolpo(hystero)pexy for treatment of symptomatic grade 3 and 4 apical pelvic organ prolapse between November 2015 and May 2019 were evaluated retrospectively. The success rates of the procedures, the surgical outcomes, and the perioperative adverse events of both groups were compared. Perioperative adverse events were categorized according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.
resultsForty-four patients underwent open abdominal sacrocolpo(hystero)pexy and 30 patients underwent robotic-assisted sacrocolpo(hystero)pexy. The mean age in the open abdominal sacrocolpo(hystero)pexy group was 68.4 ± 3.4 years and in the robotic-assisted sacrocolpo(hystero)pexy group it was 69.7 ± 4.1 years. The success rates in the open abdominal sacrocolpo(hystero)pexy and robotic-assisted sacrocolpo(hystero)pexy groups were 59% and 57% at median follow-up time of 28 months and 24 months respectively. Although the mean dosage of the analgesic (10.1 mg/24 h) and the mean length of hospital stay (2.1 days) were significantly lower and shorter for the robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy group, the mean duration of operation was considerably longer (141.2 min). The rate of grade 2 or higher complications for open abdominal sacrocolpopexy was 16% (7 out of 44) and for robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy it was 17% (5 out of 30).
conclusionsAnatomical outcomes and adverse events are similar in elderly patients undergoing open sacrocolpo(hystero)pexy and robotic-assisted sacrocolpo(hystero)pexy.
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.