Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33730233›Full record

ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2021

Timing of recurrence after surgery in pelvic organ prolapse.

Eveline J Roos, Ewoud Schuit

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Eveline J RoosTergooi, Rijksstraatweg 1, 1261 AN, Blaricum, the Netherlands. eroos@tergooi.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0517-454X
Ewoud SchuitJulius Center for Health sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Huispost Str. 6.131, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to determine when women are at risk for recurrent pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

methodsFrom 2010 to 2018, all women with symptomatic prolapse, Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (pop-Q) stage 2 in at least one compartment and prolapse surgery were included. The primary outcome measure was POP recurrence. Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated, survival curves were created, and differences in survival curves were tested with log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to investigate associations between recurrence and the number and type of involved compartment(s) and type of surgery.

resultsForty-six (16.8%) out of 274 patients had POP recurrence during a mean follow-up time of 55 ± 32 months. The mean age was 64 ± 12 years. The hazard of recurrence increased the most in the first 2 years after POP surgery, flattened in years 3 and 4 and remained almost stable in the years thereafter, regardless of the site and number of involved compartment(s). The hazard of recurrence over time seemed the largest when all three compartments were involved. However, there was no statistically significant difference in recurrence between the numbers of (p = 0.65) or in the combination of involved compartments (p = 0.19). There was no difference in POP recurrence over time between prolapse repair with either sacrospinous ligament fixation or vaginal hysterectomy (p = 0.48).

conclusionsWomen are at the highest risk of POP recurrence in the first 2 years after POP surgery independent of the number or combination of involved compartment(s).

Indexed as

Pelvic Organ ProlapseAgedFemaleHumansHysterectomy, VaginalKaplan-Meier EstimateMiddle AgedRecurrenceTreatment OutcomeCohort studyPelvic organ prolapsePOP surgeryRecurrence over time

Identifiers

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.