ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2021
Pessaries and rectovaginal fistulae: consequences of delayed clinical follow-up in the Covid-19 pandemic.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fistulae Secondary to Vaginal Pessary Use for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Systematic Review.International urogynecology journal · 2025Pooled it
- Complications of Pessaries Amenable to Surgical Correction: Two Case Reports and a Systematic Review of the Literature.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
- The impact on complication rates of delayed routine pessary reviews during the COVID-19 pandemic.International urogynecology journal · 2023Article
- A randomized controlled study comparing the objective efficacy and safety of a novel self-inserted disposable vaginal prolapse device and existing ring pessaries.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisWhile 2017 guidelines from The American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists called for pessary replacement every 3 to 4 months, a recent study in Obstetrics and Gynecology suggested that uninterrupted pessary use up to 6 months is not an independent risk factor for development of pessary-related complications.
methodsOur recent experience throughout the Covid-19 pandemic highlights the potential ramifications of delayed clinical follow-up.
resultsDuring the Covid-19 pandemic, 3 of our patients developed rectovaginal fistulae secondary to Gellhorn pessary erosion in the context of delayed clinical follow-up. Our patients had previously attended routine appointments every 3 months without complications until missed appointments secondary to the pandemic led to fistulae formation.
conclusionWe believe that delayed clinical follow-up of pessary management beyond 3 months due to the Covid-19 pandemic may lead to fistula complications in elderly women with Gellhorn pessaries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.