ArticleBMC urology2023
Anatomical and functional outcomes after bilateral sacrospinous colposuspension (BSC) for the treatment of female genital prolapse.
Article in BMC urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bilateral Sacrospinous Colposuspension with Sling for Advanced Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Anatomical and Functional Outcomes in a 235-Patient Cohort.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Long-Term Results after Bilateral Sacrospinous Colposuspension: A Prospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPelvic organ prolapse is a bothersome condition affecting many women at advanced age, but also frequently observed in young women with certain risk factors. Various surgical techniques have been developed with the aim of providing effective surgical treatment for apical prolapse. The vaginal bilateral sacrospinous colposuspension surgery (BSC) with ultralight mesh and utilization of the i- stich is a relatively new minimal invasive technique with very promising outcomes. The technique offers apical suspension, in the presence or absence of the uterus. The objective of this study is to evaluate the anatomical and functional outcomes of bilateral sacrospinous colposuspension with ultralight mesh in 30 Patients treated with the vaginal single incision standardized technique.
methodsIn this retrospective study, 30 patients were treated by BSC for significant vaginal, uterovaginal or cervical prolapse. A simultaneous anterior colporrhaphy, posterior colporrhaphy or both were performed when indicated. Anatomical and functional outcomes were assessed 1 year postoperatively using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system (POP-Q) and the standardised Prolapse Quality of Life (P-QOL) questionnair.
resultsThe POP-Q parameters were significantly improved at twelve months after surgery compared to baseline. The total score and all four subdomains of the P-QOL-questionnaire showed positive trends and improvement at twelve months after surgery when compared to preoperative values. All patients were asymptomatic and expressed high satisfaction one year after surgery. No intraoperative adverse events were recorded for all patients. Only minimal postoperative complications were recorded and they all resolved completely with conservative management.
conclusionThis study highlights the functional and anatomical outcomes of the minimally invasive vaginal bilateral sacrospinal colposuspension with ultralight mesh for the management of apical prolapse. The one year postoperative results of the proposed procedure reflect excellent outcomes with minimal complications. The data published here are very promising and warrant further investigations and more studies to evaluate the long-term outcomes of BSC in the surgical management of apical defects.
trial registrationThe study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee at the University Hospital of Cologne, Germany (Date of registration: 08.02.2022) (Registration number: 21-1494-retro) (retrospectively registered).
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.