ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2021
A comparison of modified laparoscopic uterine suspension and vaginal hysterectomy with sacrospinous ligament fixation for treating pelvic organ prolapse.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Post-Hysterectomy Vaginal Vault Prolapse: Current Perspectives and Decision-Making Considerations for Surgical Treatment.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Clinical Comparison of Sacrohysteropexy and Uterosacral Ligament Suspension in Uterovaginal Prolapse Repair: A Randomized Clinical Trial.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Quality-of-life improvements in patients after various surgical treatments for pelvic organ prolapse.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Review
- Quality of Life Following Pelvic Organ Prolapse Treatments in Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the efficacy and adverse events between modified laparoscopic uterine suspension and vaginal hysterectomy and sacrospinous ligament fixation.
methodsThe study reviewed the clinical data of 50 postmenopausal patients who underwent modified laparoscopic uterine suspension (the hysteropexy group) and 50 patients who underwent vaginal hysterectomy with sacrospinous ligament fixation (the hysterectomy group) conducted by the same group of surgeons (2018.1-2019.6) retrospectively. We compared the two groups' baseline characteristics, perioperative details, complications, and POP-Q values before the operations and at 12 months after the operations. The effects on quality of life according to valid questionnaires (PFIQ-7 and PFDI-20) were compared. The patients were followed up for 12 months.
resultsThere were no significant differences in the perioperative details or baseline characteristics, except that more cases of concurrent vaginal wall (anterior and posterior) and concurrent perineal repair were observed in the hysteropexy group than in the hysterectomy group (9 versus 0,
conclusionsThe postoperative outcomes, anatomical results, and improvement of function and symptoms of modified laparoscopic uterine suspension were similar to those of vaginal hysterectomy with sacrospinous ligament fixation. Moreover, modified laparoscopic uterine suspension had fewer postoperative complications, so it could be used as an additional choice for POP, although the long-term outcomes haven't been determined yet.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34150175PMC8205734W3175701082What 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.