Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34109716›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association2021

Does ventral mesh rectopexy at the time of sacrocolpopexy prevent subsequent posterior wall prolapse?

Michael G. Baracy Jr, Casey Richardsona, Kyle R. Mackeya, Karen H. Hagglund, Muhammad Faisal Aslam

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael G. Baracy JrDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ascension St. John Hospital, Michigan, United States of AmericaORCID 0000-0003-2437-3541
Casey RichardsonaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ascension St. John Hospital, Michigan, United States of AmericaORCID 0000-0002-2904-3851
Kyle R. MackeyaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ascension St. John Hospital, Michigan, United States of AmericaORCID 0000-0002-1525-7189
Karen H. HagglundDepartment Biomedical Investigations and Research, Ascension St. John Hospital, Michigan, United States of AmericaORCID 0000-0003-2089-063X
Muhammad Faisal AslamDepartment of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Ascension St. John Hospital, Michigan, United States of AmericaORCID 0000-0002-4101-0382
Michigan United · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether ventral mesh rectopexy at the time of sacrocolpopexy reduces the rate of future posterior wall prolapse. Material and Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of women with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) who underwent sacrocolpopexy or without concomitant rectopexy at a single community hospital from December 1, 2015 to June 30, 2019. Preoperative pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) and urodynamic testing was used in evaluation of POP. Patients were followed for 12-weeks postoperatively and a 12-week postoperative POP-Q assessment was completed. The incidence of new or recurrent posterior prolapse was compared between cohorts. Results: Women with POP (n=150) were recruited, of whom 41 (27.3%) underwent sacrocolpopexy while the remainder (n=109, 72.7%) did not receive rectopexy. Patient demographics did not statistically differ between cohorts. Post-surgical posterior wall prolapse was reduced in the robotic assisted sacrocolpopexy (RASC) + rectopexy group compared to RASC alone, however this did not reach statistical significance. There were no patients who underwent concomitant rectopexy and RASC that needed recurrent posterior wall prolapse surgery, compared to eight-percent of patients that underwent isolated RASC procedures. Conclusion: Our findings suggest a reduction in the need for subsequent posterior wall surgery when rectopexy is performed at the time of sacrocolpopexy. In our study, no future surgery for POP was found in the concomitant sacrocolpopexy and rectopexy group, while a small proportion of the RASC only group required future POP surgery. Our study, however, was underpowered to elucidate a statistically significant difference between groups. Future larger studies are needed to confirm a reduced risk of posterior wall prolapse in patients who undergo concomitant RASC and rectopexy.

Indexed as

minimally invasive surgerymulticompartmental prolapsePelvic organ prolapserectopexysacrocolpopexy

Identifiers

PMID34109716
PMCPMC8420747
OpenAlexW3169258064

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.