ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2023
Long term follow-up after minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anterior-Only Sacrocolpopexy Complicated by Obstructive Enterocele: Should Both Compartments Always Be Repaired?Cureus · 2025Article
- Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Current Challenges and Future Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- [Mid-Term Efficacy Evaluation of Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy vs Laparoscopic Pectopexy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2025Article
- Management of Sacrocolpopexy Mesh Complications-A Narrative Review and Clinical Experience from a Large-Volume Center.International urogynecology journal · 2025Review
- Impact of Age and Body Mass Index on the Outcomes of Laparoscopic Mesh Sacrocolpopexy.Obstetrics and gynecology international · 2025Article
- Very long-term outcomes of robotic mesh sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse repair.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisPelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a benign condition that can adversely affect women's quality of life. Minimally invasive mesh sacrocolpopexy is an effective surgical treatment for POP. This study aims to assess the perioperative, postoperative, and long term (10 years) outcome of a single institution cohort undergoing minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy.
methodsThis retrospective study included all cases of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy performed between 2003 and 2016. Patients were contacted by phone in 2022 for long term follow-up. Data on operative time, length of hospital stay, conversion rate, perioperative injuries, early and late postoperative complications and subjective success rates were collected.
resultsNinety-five patients were included aged 60±12 years. Most patients (72%) presented grade 3 POP. Grade of prolapse (3±0.4 vs 3±0.5, p<0.01) and hospital stay (3±1.1 vs 3.1±1.7; p<0.01) were significantly higher in patients who developed early postoperative complications (1
conclusionsLaparoscopic mesh sacrocolpopexy is a safe surgical technique that shows satisfying and consistent long-term results despite the occasional onset of new urinary symptoms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36576540What 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.