Observational studyArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024
Laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh for severe anterior and apical pelvic organ prolapse: an observational cohort study for safety and efficacy at 2-year follow-up.
Observational study in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh for pelvic organ prolapse: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Pooled it
- vNOTES Versus Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension for Advanced Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Single-Center, Single-Surgeon Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension for Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Systematic Review of Current Evidence on Clinical Outcomes and Safety.International journal of women's health · 2026Review
- Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Current Challenges and Future Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
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
purposeThis study aimed to investigate the clinical safety and efficacy of laparoscopic lateral suspension (LLS) with mesh in the treatment of severe anterior and apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP) Chinese women with a 2-year follow-up.
methodsWe conducted an observational cohort study. Sixty patients who presented apical (uterovaginal or vault) and anterior prolapse at stage 3 or higher were enrolled. The LLS surgical procedure was performed in accordance with Dubuisson standard operation. The objective and subjective cures as well as the surgery-related complications were evaluated. The POP-related questionnaires were used to evaluate the quality of life before operation and at 24 months after operation follow-up.
resultsObjective cure rates at 2 years of follow-up were 88.3% for the anterior compartment, 100% for the apical compartment and 93.3% for the posterior compartment. The subjective cure rate reached to 93.3%. There were statistically significant lower scores of the pelvic floor impact questionnaire-7 (PFIQ-7) and the pelvic floor distress inventory-short form-20 (PFDI-20) for all women after surgery and they exhibited similar scores of the pelvic organ prolapsed-urinary incontinence sexual questionnaire-12 (PISQ-12) (P = 0.317). And no significant difference was demonstrated in international consultation on the incontinent questionnaire short form (ICI-Q-SF) (P = 0.551). No major complications associated with LLS were observed in our study.
conclusionWe consider that LLS with mesh operation is safe, feasible and effective to correct severe apical and anterior POP after 2-year follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39443373What 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.