ArticleThe Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology2022
Pelvic organ prolapse in nulliparae.
Article in The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology, 2022. 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.
- Contrast-enhanced Micro-CT imaging of a foetal female pelvic floor reveals anatomical details.PloS one · 2025Article
- Quantitative 3D Analysis of Levator Ani Muscle Subdivisions in Nulliparous Women: MRI Feasibility Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Exploring nulliparous women's perceptions of pelvic organ prolapse treatments: A qualitative study for enhancing nursing care in Romania.Belitung nursing journal · 2024Article
- International urogynecology consultation chapter 3 committee 2; conservative treatment of patient with pelvic organ prolapse: Pelvic floor muscle training.International urogynecology journal · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPregnancy and childbirth are thought to be the strongest environmental risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse, but prolapse does occur in nulliparae.
aimTo characterise prolapse in vaginal nulliparae. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis was a retrospective study using archived clinical and imaging data of 368 vaginally nulliparous women seen between 2006 and 2017 at two tertiary urogynaecological centres. Patients underwent a standardised interview, clinical examination and 3D/4D translabial ultrasound. Volume datasets were analysed by the second author, blinded against all clinical data, using post-processing software on a personal computer. Significant prolapse was defined as Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system stage ≥2 for the anterior and posterior compartment, and stage ≥1 for the central compartment. On imaging, significant prolapse was defined as previously described.
resultsOf 4297 women seen during the inclusion period, 409 were vaginally nulliparous, for whom 368 volume data sets could be retrieved. Mean age was 50 years (17-89) and mean body mass index 29 (16-64). Eighty-one (22%) presented with prolapse symptoms. On clinical examination, 106 women (29%) had significant prolapse, mostly of the posterior compartment (n = 70, 19%). On imaging 64 women showed evidence of significant prolapse (17%), again mostly posterior (n = 47, 13%). Rectovaginal septal defects were even more common in 69 (19%). On multivariate analysis we found no differences between true nulliparae (n = 184) and women delivered exclusively by caesarean section (n = 184).
conclusionsProlapse occurs in vaginal nulliparae, but it has distinct characteristics. Rectocele predominates, while cystocele and uterine prolapse are uncommon. Pregnancy and caesarean delivery seem to have little effect.
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.