ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Very long-term outcomes of robotic mesh sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse repair.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Surgical Challenge of the Repeat Sacrocolpopexy.International urogynecology journal · 2026Review
- From Mesh to Modern Therapies: An Updated Narrative Review on Urogenital Prolapse.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Feasibility and Clinical Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy Using Autologous Round Ligament Grafts: A Novel Non-Mesh Surgical Approach for Pelvic Organ Prolapse.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
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
To assess the very long-term functional outcomes and complications of robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy (RASC) at our institution where this robotic technology for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair has been available since 2006. A retrospective review of a cohort of women who underwent a RASC was performed by an investigator not involved in the clinical care of these patients. Women with no electronic medical record follow-up in the last 2 years were contacted by telephone. The primary outcome was RASC success defined as (1) no self-report of vaginal bulge, (2) no prolapse beyond the hymen (POP-Q > 0), and (3) no retreatment for prolapse (surgery, pessary). Postoperative symptomatic urinary incontinence (UI), anorectal dysfunction, dyspareunia and any late complication were secondary outcomes. Of 100 women who underwent RASC between 2007 and 2018, 79 patients with a median age of 66 years (IQR 58-71) were included. Median follow-up was 69 months (28-117), with a last visit more than 5 years postoperatively in 48 patients and more than 10 years in 19 patients. A total of 59 patients (75%) met the definition of success. A bothersome vaginal bulge was reported in 18 patients (23%), prolapse beyond the hymen was observed in 12 patients (16%), and further surgery for POP was performed in 9 patients (12%). Twenty-three patients reported postoperative UI (32%) and 21 reported postoperative anorectal dysfunction (39%). RASC provided good long-term results with an unpredictable risk of recurrence independent of the timeline.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39671018What 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.