Trial reportInternational urogynecology journal2021
Association of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification examination D point with uterosacral ligament suspension outcomes: the "OPTIMAL" D point.
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 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.
- Evaluation and Management of Recurrent Pelvic Organ Prolapse.Current urology reports · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe objective was to determine the relationship between the preoperative D-point and apical outcomes at 24 months, using the Operations and Pelvic Muscle Training in the Management of Apical Support Loss (OPTIMAL) dataset.
methodsThis was a secondary analysis of the OPTIMAL trial, a randomized multi-centered study comparing outcomes of sacrospinous ligament fixation and transvaginal uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS). The 2-year dataset utilized included women undergoing USLS with concomitant hysterectomy. The primary outcome was the relationship between preoperative D-point and apical outcomes at 24 months. Secondary objectives were to determine the relationship between preoperative D-point and anatomical, composite and subjective outcomes, and to determine a D-point cut-off that could be used to predict success in each of these categories.
resultsOf the 186 women in the USLS arm, 120 were available for analysis of anatomical failure at 24 months. A higher preoperative D-point correlated with improved apical outcome (C-point) at 24 months (r = 0.34; p value = 0.0002). Using ROC curves, a moderate association was found between the preoperative D-point and apical and anatomical success, (AUC 0.689 and 0.662). There was no relationship between preoperative D-point and composite or subjective success (AUC 0.577 and 0.458). Based on the ROC curves, a "cut-off" D-point value of -4.25 cm (sensitivity = 0.58, specificity = 0.67) was determined to be a predictor of postoperative anatomical success at 2 years.
conclusionsPreoperative D-point correlates with postoperative anatomical and apical support, but is less successful at predicting subjective outcomes. The strongest predictive D-point cut-off for anatomical and apical success at 24 months was -4.25 cm.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33710427What 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.