ReviewUrologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2025
[Vaginal pelvic floor reconstruction techniques].
Review in Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Pelvic floor reconstruction-An interdisciplinary overview].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common condition affecting women. It results from weakening of the pelvic floor muscles and connective tissues and is particularly common among postmenopausal women. This weakening can lead to descent of the pelvic organs, including the bladder, uterus, and rectum, into or beyond the vaginal canal, causing significant discomfort and impairment of quality of life. Vaginal prolapse surgery is a key therapeutic approach for severe cases of POP, aiming to restore pelvic anatomy and improve functional outcomes. Surgical interventions for vaginal prolapse can be broadly categorized into native tissue repair, mesh-augmented procedures, and obliterative techniques, each with distinct indications, benefits, and risks. While traditional colporrhaphy remains a widely used technique, the introduction of synthetic meshes has improved anatomical success rates, albeit with concerns regarding complications such as erosion and dyspareunia. This article provides an overview of current surgical techniques for vaginal prolapse repair, evaluating their outcomes and complications as well as recent developments in the field. Understanding these aspects is crucial for optimizing patient-centered treatment strategies and ensuring long-term success.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40307494What 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.