ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2022
A robotic approach to management of failed sacrocolpopexy and sacrocolpopexy complications: a case series.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Surgical Challenge of the Repeat Sacrocolpopexy.International urogynecology journal · 2026Review
- Evaluation and Management of Recurrent Pelvic Organ Prolapse.Current urology reports · 2025Review
- Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation After Failed Sacrocolpopexy: A Case Series.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisApproximately 5% of patients pursue reoperation after sacrocolpopexy (SCP). Reasons for re-operation include recurrence of prolapse, mesh erosion, bowel and bladder dysfunction, and pain. We aim to describe patient presentation, intraoperative findings, and subsequent robotic approach to management of SCP failures and complications.
methodsThis is a case series of patients who underwent abdominal re-exploration after SCP over 7 years at a single institution. Demographic data, previous prolapse surgery, presenting complaint, prolapse stage, operative notes, and outcomes were reviewed. Nineteen patients were identified by CPT codes; ten met inclusion criteria.
resultsSeven of the ten patients presented with vaginal bulge, urinary frequency and urgency; four also had stress urinary incontinence. Two patients presented with vaginal bleeding and another with vaginal pain. Operative findings on reoperation for patients who had vaginal bulge included detachment from the vagina or cervix (n = 4, 57%) and the anterior longitudinal ligament (n = 3, 43%). Of these, two had their SCP mesh reattached, and five had SCP mesh removal and replacement. The patients with vaginal bleeding and pain underwent mesh excisions. All ten patients had uncomplicated postoperative courses with resolution of symptoms in most cases.
conclusionsProlapse recurrence and complications after SCP have a significant impact on patient quality of life. Recurrent prolapse after SCP theoretically occurs because of mesh detachment from the cervix/vagina, the anterior longitudinal ligament, or disruption/stretching of the mesh. Our case series demonstrates that abdominal re-exploration is feasible and valuable in these rare cases.
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.