ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2021
Perioperative outcomes of reconstructive surgery for apical prolapse in the very elderly: a national contemporary analysis.
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 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Age and Body Mass Index on the Outcomes of Laparoscopic Mesh Sacrocolpopexy.Obstetrics and gynecology international · 2025Article
- How Old Is Too Old? Outcomes of Prolapse Native-Tissue Repair through Uterosacral Suspension in Octogenarians.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisIt is predicted that the number of women aged 80 years or older will more than triple by 2050. In the US, women have a 13% lifetime risk of undergoing pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Our aim was to compare the perioperative outcomes following various reconstructive approaches for apical prolapse surgery in the very elderly.
methodsThe National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to identify women age ≥ 80 years of age who underwent reconstructive apical prolapse surgery from 2010 to 2017. Perioperative morbidity of vaginal colpopexy, minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy (MISC) and abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) were compared. The primary outcome was the rate of composite serious complications. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of serious complications.
resultsA total of 1012 patients were identified: vaginal (n = 792), MISC (n = 151) and ASC (n = 69). The composite serious complication rate was higher in the ASC group compared to vaginal/MISC groups (18.8% vs. 9.3% and 9.3%, p < 0.05). ASC had higher rates of blood transfusion, thromboembolism and reintubation. Life-threatening complications, readmission, pneumonia, stroke and 30-day mortality were lowest in the vaginal group. ASC (aOR 2.27), age > 85 years (aOR 1.98), operative time > 3 h (aOR 2.02), baseline dyspnea (aOR 2.17), "other race" (aOR 2.04), preoperative coagulopathy (aOR 2.92) and ASA (aOR 1.47) were associated with composite serious complications.
conclusionASC is associated with higher perioperative morbidity in the very elderly population. MISC and vaginal colpopexy have similar rates of composite serious complications; however, vaginal colpopexy is overall the safest approach in this population.
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.