Trial reportArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025
Comparing combined paravaginal repair with pubocervical fascia plication versus standard anterior colporrhaphy for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women with anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStress urinary incontinence (SUI) is prevalent among women, often occurring alongside anterior vaginal wall prolapse. This study compares the efficacy and safety of an improved vaginal wall repair technique with pubocervical fascia fixation versus standard anterior colporrhaphy for treating SUI in women with anterior vaginal wall prolapse.
methodsA single-centre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial was conducted between September 2021 and June 2024. Women aged 40-70 years with symptomatic SUI and stage 2-3 anterior vaginal wall prolapse were randomised to either the improved repair group or the standard repair group. The primary outcome was patient-reported success at 12 months post-surgery, defined as 'very much improved' or 'much improved' on the Patient Global Impression of Improvement scale. Secondary outcomes included objective cure rates, quality of life scores, urodynamic parameters, anatomical outcomes, perioperative outcomes and adverse events.
resultsA total of 102 women were randomised (51 in each group). At 12 months, the patient-reported success rate was significantly higher in the improved repair group (94.1% vs 78.4%, p = 0.019). The objective cure rate was also higher in the improved repair group (90.2% vs 74.5%, p = 0.038). Quality of life scores and urodynamic parameters showed greater improvements in the improved repair group. Anatomical success was achieved in 92.2% of the improved repair group compared with 80.4% in the standard repair group (p = 0.048). The improved repair technique was associated with longer operative time but lower estimated blood loss, shorter hospital stay and quicker return to normal activities. The overall complication rate was lower in the improved repair group (11.8% vs 23.5%, p = 0.043).
conclusionsThe improved vaginal wall repair with pubocervical fascia fixation demonstrates superior outcomes compared with standard anterior colporrhaphy, with higher patient-reported success rates, improved quality of life and fewer complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39733374What 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.