ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2021
Structural failure sites in posterior vaginal wall prolapse: stress 3D MRI-based 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Chapter 4.5: New Proposed Treatments for Pelvic Organ Prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe objective was to identify structural failure sites in rectocele by comparing women with and those without posterior vaginal wall prolapse and accessing their relative contribution to rectocele size based on stress MRI-based measurements.
methodsWe studied three-dimensional stress MRI at maximal Valsalva of 25 women with (cases) and 25 without (controls) posterior vaginal prolapse of similar age and parity. Vaginal wall factors (posterior wall length and width); attachment factors (paravaginal posterior wall location, posterior fornix height, and perineal height); and hiatal factors (hiatal size and levator ani defects) were measured using Slicer 4.3.0® and a custom Python program. Stepwise linear regression was used to assess the relative contribution of all factors to the posterior prolapse size.
resultsWe identified three primary factors with large effect sizes of 2 or greater: two attachment factors-posterior paravaginal descent and perineal height; and one hiatal factor-genital hiatus size. These were the strongest predictors of the presence and size of rectocele, the most common failure sites, found in 60-76% of cases; and highly correlated with one another (r = 0.72-0.84, p < .001). Longer vaginal length, wider distal vagina, lower posterior fornix, and larger levator ani hiatus had smaller effect sizes and were less likely to fall outside the norm (20-24%) than the three primary factors. When considering all the supporting factors, the combination of perineal height, posterior fornix height, and vaginal length explained 73% of the variation in rectocele size.
conclusionsLower perineal and lateral posterior vaginal location and enlarged genital hiatus size were strong predictors of rectocele occurrence and size and correlated highly.
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.