ArticleBMC surgery2023
Transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery versus conventional vaginal surgery for sacrospinous ligament fixation of apical compartment prolapse: a retrospective analysis.
Article in BMC surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Trendelenburg angle on perioperative outcomes during gasless vNOTES surgeries: a retrospective comparative study.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- vNOTES vs Minimally Invasive Colpopexy: National Study and Literature Review.International urogynecology journal · 2026Review
- A Pilot Study of Kocher Forceps-Guided Laparoscopic Transvaginal Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation: Technique and Initial Clinical Experience.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Three surgical approaches for retroperitoneal transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES).Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Safety and feasibility analysis of transvaginal extraperitoneal space anatomical sacrospinous ligament suspension in the treatment of moderate to severe pelvic organ prolapse: a retrospective comparative cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Transvaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (vNOTES) in Urogynecological Surgery: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- vNOTES versus Laparoscopic Uterosacral Ligament Suspension for Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Perioperative and Short-Term Outcomes.International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery hysterectomy versus vaginal hysterectomy for benign indications.AJOG global reports · 2024Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo objectively assess the safety, feasibility, advantages, and disadvantages of transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) versus conventional vaginal (CV) surgery for sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF).
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the data of patients who underwent hysterectomy for SSLF via vNOTES or CV surgery due to apical compartment prolapse between April 2019 and April 2020 at our hospital. The patients were classified into the vNOTES group (n = 31) and CV surgery group (n = 51) based on surgical approach and their general characteristics and perioperative outcomes compared.
resultsThe two groups had similar general characteristics. The anatomical success and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy rates were higher in the vNOTES than CV surgery group, while the postoperative stay was shorter in the vNOTES than CV surgery group. All differences were statistically significant. However, there were no statistically significant intergroup differences in operation time, bilateral salpingectomy rate, colporrhaphy rate, postoperative visual analog scale score, estimated blood loss, hemoglobin decrease at 72 h postoperative, maximum body temperature at 72 h postoperative, complication rate, buttock pain, or Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7 and Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Questionnaire-20 scores at 1 year postoperative.
conclusionsVNOTES for SSLF was safe and feasible and resulted in superior objective and subjective outcomes versus CV surgery for SSLF. These findings suggest that vNOTES could be an alternative to CV surgery for SSLF.
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.