Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35113228›Full record

Trial reportLangenbeck's archives of surgery2022

Sexual and functional outcomes after prolapse surgery: a randomized prospective comparison of trocarless transvaginal mesh and pelvic organ prolapse suspension.

Andrea Fuschi, Alessia Martoccia, Yazan Al Salhi, Martina Maggi, Lorenzo Capone, Paolo Pietro Suraci, Alice Antonioni, Giorgio Bozzini, Ester Illiano, Elisabetta Costantini and 4 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 42% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Article
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

14 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Andrea FuschiFaculty of Pharmacy and Medicine, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Urology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, ICOT, Corso della Repubblica 79, 04100, Latina, Italy.
Alessia MartocciaFaculty of Pharmacy and Medicine, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Urology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, ICOT, Corso della Repubblica 79, 04100, Latina, Italy.
Yazan Al SalhiFaculty of Pharmacy and Medicine, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Urology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, ICOT, Corso della Repubblica 79, 04100, Latina, Italy.
Martina MaggiFaculty of Pharmacy and Medicine, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Urology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, ICOT, Corso della Repubblica 79, 04100, Latina, Italy.
Lorenzo CaponeFaculty of Pharmacy and Medicine, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Urology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, ICOT, Corso della Repubblica 79, 04100, Latina, Italy.
Paolo Pietro SuraciFaculty of Pharmacy and Medicine, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Urology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, ICOT, Corso della Repubblica 79, 04100, Latina, Italy.
Alice AntonioniFaculty of Pharmacy and Medicine, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Urology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, ICOT, Corso della Repubblica 79, 04100, Latina, Italy.
Giorgio BozziniDepartment of Urology, ASST Valle Olona, Busto Arsizio, Varese, Italy.
Ester IllianoDepartment of Surgical and Biomedical Science, Andrological and Urogynecological Clinic, Santa Maria Terni Hospital, University of Perugia, Terni, TR, Italy.
Elisabetta CostantiniDepartment of Surgical and Biomedical Science, Andrological and Urogynecological Clinic, Santa Maria Terni Hospital, University of Perugia, Terni, TR, Italy.
Alessandro ZucchiDepartment of Translationals Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Mauro CervigniFaculty of Pharmacy and Medicine, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Urology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, ICOT, Corso della Repubblica 79, 04100, Latina, Italy.
Antonio CarboneFaculty of Pharmacy and Medicine, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Urology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, ICOT, Corso della Repubblica 79, 04100, Latina, Italy.
Antonio Luigi PastoreFaculty of Pharmacy and Medicine, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Urology Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, ICOT, Corso della Repubblica 79, 04100, Latina, Italy. antopast@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4293-9174
Sapienza University of Rome · ITUniversity of Perugia · ITOspedale di Circolo di Busto Arsizio · ITPoliclinico Umberto I · ITUniversity of Pisa · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeStress urinary incontinence (SUI) related to pelvic organ prolapse represents a common condition that negatively impacts female sexual activity. Laparoscopic pelvic organ prolapse surgery (POPs) and the anterior repair with a trocar-less trans-vaginal mesh (TTMs) represent two different surgical techniques to treat SUI secondary to POP. This study aimed to report the results of these techniques comparing the sexual and functional outcome improvement. MATERIALS AND

methodsFifty-nine sexually active female patients, complaining of urodynamic stress incontinence, were enrolled in this prospective study, and simply randomized in two groups: 29 POPs and 30 TTMs. All patients were studied at baseline and 6 months after surgery. Preoperative evaluation included medical history, urodynamic test, Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI), and pelvic magnetic resonance defecography. Six months after surgery, all patients completed the FSFI and the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UI SF) and were investigated with a uroflowmetry test with post-void residual volume (PVR).

resultsAt 6 months after surgery, 87% of POPs patients and 79% of TTMs subjects resulted dry. No statistically significant results were obtained in terms of urinary outcomes between the two surgical groups. Regarding sexual function, POPs group exhibited a significant greater improvement of global FSFI (mean: 27.4; SD: 4.31) compared to TTMs group (mean FSFI: 23.56; SD: 2.28; p-value ≤ 0.0001).

conclusionsOur results indicated that POPs and TTMs lead to satisfactory and safe functional outcomes with a good recovery of urinary continence. Furthermore, POPs, when compared to TTMs, led to a greater improvement of sexual function.

Indexed as

Pelvic Organ ProlapseUrinary IncontinenceUrinary Incontinence, StressFemaleHumansProspective StudiesSexual BehaviorSurgical MeshLaparoscopyMinimally invasive surgeryPelvic organ prolapseSexual functionTrans-vaginal meshUrinary outcomes

Identifiers

PMID35113228
OpenAlexW4210495269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.