ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2022
Female sexuality before and after sacrocolpopexy or vaginal mesh: is vaginal length one of the key factors?
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Pelvic Organ Prolapse with Concomitant Short Total Vaginal Length and Outcomes of Laparoscopic Mesh Sacrocolpopexy.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Mesh-sacropexy in women with apical pelvic organ prolapse - results of a single-centre prospective cohort study.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Brazilian Portuguese Translation and Validation of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire-IUGA revised.International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- Comparison of sexual function between laparoscopic lateral suspension and laparoscopic sacrocervicopexy with the use of the PISQ-IR questionnaire.Frontiers in medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisWe aimed to demonstrate that laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy/cervicopexy (LSC-Cx) versus anterior vaginal mesh (AVM) results in a longer vaginal length without impacting sexual activity or function.
methodsWe performed a secondary analysis of sexual outcomes of a previous randomized control trial comparing LSC-Cx and AVM in 120 women (60/group) with symptomatic POP stage ≥ 3. We evaluated sexually active (SA) and non-sexually active women (NSA) using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire-IUGA-Revised (PISQ-IR) preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. Multivariate logistic and linear regression models were built to assess the impact of different variables on sexual activity and function, respectively.
resultsAmong 120 women included, no statistically significant differences were found between vaginal length and preoperative dyspareunia (20.7% AVM vs. 22,8% LSC-Cx) comparing SA to NSA women and LSC-Cx to AVM. Vaginal length was significantly longer after LSC-Cx versus AVM (p < 0.001). The postoperative dyspareunia rate was 17.2% AVM versus 10.5% LSC-Cx. Partnered women were significantly more likely to be SA than unpartnered women before (OR = 19.04; p = 0.006) and after surgery (OR = 36.28; p = 0.002). Only dyspareunia was independently associated with sexual function pre- (B = -0.431; p = 0.017) and postoperatively (B = -0.3 96; p = 0.007).
conclusionsVaginal length was greater following LSC-Cx compared to AVM. While vaginal length has no impact on female sexuality pre- and postoperatively, the most important factors were "having a partner" for sexual activity and dyspareunia for sexual function. Persistence of dyspareunia was higher after AVM. LSC-Cx should be considered in women with POP undergoing mesh surgery with future sexual expectations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34061234What 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.