ArticleFrontiers in surgery2023
Case report: Transvaginal single-port extraperitoneal laparoscopic sacrospinous ligament fixation for apical prolapse: A single-center case series.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- A Pilot Study of Kocher Forceps-Guided Laparoscopic Transvaginal Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation: Technique and Initial Clinical Experience.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) is a minimally invasive and effective procedure for the treatment of apical prolapse. Because intraoperative exposure of the sacrospinous ligament is difficult, SSLF is difficult. The aim of our article is to determine the safety and feasibility of single-port extraperitoneal laparoscopic SSLF for apical prolapse. Methods: This single-center, single-surgeon case series study included 9 patients with pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) III or IV apical prolapse who underwent single-port laparoscopic SSLF. Additionally, transobturator tension-free vaginal tap (TVT-O) was performed in 2 patients, and anterior pelvic mesh reconstruction was performed in 1 patient. Results: The operative time ranged from 75 to 105 (mean, 88.9 ± 10.2) min, and blood loss ranged from 25 to 100 (mean, 43.3 ± 22.6) ml. No serious operative complications, blood transfusions, visceral injuries, or postoperative gluteal pain were reported for these patients. After 2-4 months of follow-up, no recurrence of POP, gluteal pain, urinary retention/incontinence, or other complications was observed. Conclusion: Transvaginal single-port SSLF is a safe, effective, and easy-to-master operation for apical prolapse.
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.