ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Perioperative and Long-Term Anatomical and Subjective Outcomes of Laparoscopic Pectopexy and Sacrospinous Ligament Suspension for POP-Q Stages II-IV Apical Prolapse.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Postoperative Functional Recovery and Anatomical Restoration in Patients with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Undergoing Three Types of Apical Suspension Techniques: A Retrospective Study.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Observation of medium-term outcomes of transvaginal extraperitoneal high uterosacral ligament suspension with anterior mesh without hysterectomy for advanced multi-compartmental prolapse.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Observational
- A Comparative Evaluation of Double Versus Loop Suture Techniques in Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation Over Two Years.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life After Laparoscopic Pectopexy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Interpretable personalized surgical recommendation with joint consideration of multiple decisional dimensions.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- The Effectiveness of Mesh-Less Pectopexy in the Treatment of Vaginal Apical Prolapse-A Prospective Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Long-Term Outcomes (10 Years) of Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation for Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Recurrent Pelvic Organ Prolapse after Sacrocolpopexy-A Surgical Challenge.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Quality-of-life improvements in patients after various surgical treatments for pelvic organ prolapse.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Review
- Laparoscopic Pectopexy versus Vaginal Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation in the Treatment of Apical Prolapse.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Editorial: Changing backgrounds and groundbreaking changes: Gynecological surgery in the third decade of the 21st century.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- G-Mesh for Laparoscopic Pectopexy: A Single-center Evaluation of a Novel Technique for Apical Prolapse Repair.Journal of mid-life healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this paper was to analyze perioperative and long-term outcomes in 114 women undergoing surgery for POP-Q ≥ 2 apical prolapse: sacrospinous ligament colpo/hysteropexy (SSLF/SSHP)—61; laparoscopic pectopexy (LP)—53. Validated questionnaires (PGI-I, ISI, #35 EPIQ, PFIQ-7, PFDI-20) were completed at baseline and follow-up. POP-Q stages II, III and IV were diagnosed in 1 (0.9%), 84 (73.7%) and 29 (25.4%) patients, respectively. Mean operative time and hospital stay were 151.8 ± 36.2 min/2.6 ± 1.1 days for LP and 69 ± 20.4 min (p < 0.001)/2.7 ± 1.0 days for SSLF. Severe intraoperative complications occurred in two (1.8%) patients. Mean follow-up was 26.9 ± 12 and 37.3 ± 17.5 months for LP and SSLF, respectively. At follow-up, significant improvement for all POP-Q points was observed in both groups (p < 0.001). Shortening of total vaginal length was found in both groups, but predominantly in SSLF patients (p = 0.01). The sensation of vaginal bulge (EPIQ) was reduced, and total PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 scores improved (p < 0.04) in both groups. Subjective success was reported by 40 (75.5%) LP and 44 (72.1%) SSLF patients. ISI detected no deterioration in urinary incontinence. PGI-I, PFDI-20, #35 EPIQ, PFIQ-7 and ISI did not differ between the groups. In conclusion both, SSLF and LP for apical prolapse generate good anatomical and subjective outcomes, with protective effect on the anterior compartment observed for LP.
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.