ArticleJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
Comparing Surgical Outcomes in Laparoscopic Sacral Hysteropexy with or without Retroperitoneal Tunneling.
Article in JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. 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
Background and Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and impact of the retroperitoneal tunneling technique on the surgical time and outcomes of laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy (SHP) for treating pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective single-center cohort study in a tertiary referral center. Thirty-two consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic SHP for apical prolapse between 2016 and 2023. Laparoscopic SHP with or without right pelvic side wall retroperitoneal tunneling. The primary outcome was surgical time. Secondary outcomes included blood loss, intra-and postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain scores, and improvement in POP quantification (POP-Q) scores. Statistical analyses were performed using t-tests and multiple regression. Statistical significance was set at Results: The tunneling group (n = 14) demonstrated significantly shorter surgical times than the nontunneling (n = 18) group (60.79 ± 22.35 minutes vs 98.06 ± 26.28 minutes, Conclusion: The retroperitoneal tunneling technique in laparoscopic SHP significantly reduces the surgical time without increasing the risk of complications. These findings suggest that tunneling is a safe and efficient method that can be routinely adopted for SHP.
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.