ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2025
Bony birth canal and pelvic organ prolapse: a quantitative assessment for dimensions of pelvic midplanes based on MRI.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 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.
- A novel description of dynamic organ-specific trajectories in pelvic organ prolapse based on magnetic resonance imaging traces.BMC medical imaging · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeDimensions of the bony birth canal are hypothesized to be associated with pelvic organ prolapse (POP). However, the pelvic midplane, which represents the narrowest obstetrical plane, has not been thoroughly investigated. This study aims to compare the bony dimensions at the level of the pelvic midplane in childbearing women with and without POP and to evaluate their association with POP.
methodsData from 131 patients with POP were prospectively collected between 2021 and 2023. A total of 85 cases were matched with 85 controls who had comparable demographic characteristics. A case-control study was conducted to compare bony dimensions at the pelvic midplane level between women with and without POP using 3D MRI models. Additionally, analysis of covariance was performed to examine the relationship between these dimensions and the maximum prolapse.
resultsThe comparison of dimensions (in centimeters) between 85 cases and 85 controls revealed the following significant differences: anterior-posterior diameter (11.3 ± 0.7 vs. 10.7 ± 0.7, p < 0.001); pubic symphysis to ischial spine-left (9.4 ± 0.4 vs. 9.1 ± 0.4, p < 0.001),-right (9.5 ± 0.4 vs. 9.1 ± 0.4, p < 0.001); Ischial spine to sacrococcygeal junction-left (6.7 ± 0.5 vs. 6.5 ± 0.5, p = 0.002),-right (6.7 ± 0.5 vs. 6.5 ± 0.5, p = 0.002); interspinous diameter (11.1 ± 0.7 vs. 10.8 ± 0.7, p = 0.004); and the area of the pelvic midplane (63.0 ± 0.6 vs. 58.5 ± 0.6 cm
conclusionWomen with POP have significantly larger bony dimensions at the level of the pelvic midplane compared to women without POP. Additionally, advanced prolapse is associated with larger mid-pelvic dimensions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40419707What 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.