Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41042324›Full record

SynthesisArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025

Lateral suspension vs. sacral colpopexy for treating pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Andrea Lombisani, Veronica Tius, Chiara Ferraro, Martina Arcieri, Lorenzo Vacca, Daniela Caramazza, Stefano Restaino, Tommaso Simoncini, Giampiero Capobianco, Alfredo Ercoli and 3 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Andrea Lombisani *Gynecological Surgery Unit, Dipartimento Centro di Eccellenza Donna e Bambino Nascente, Ospedale Isola Tiberina-Gemelli Isola, Rome, Italy.
Veronica Tius *Medical Area Department (DAME), in Department of Medicine (DMED), University of Udine, Piazzale S. Maria Della Misericordia 15, Udine, Italy.
Chiara FerraroUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Martina ArcieriClinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "S. Maria Della Misericordia" University Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale (ASUFC), Udine, Italy.
Lorenzo VaccaGynecological Surgery Unit, Dipartimento Centro di Eccellenza Donna e Bambino Nascente, Ospedale Isola Tiberina-Gemelli Isola, Rome, Italy.
Daniela CaramazzaGynecological Surgery Unit, Dipartimento Centro di Eccellenza Donna e Bambino Nascente, Ospedale Isola Tiberina-Gemelli Isola, Rome, Italy.
Stefano RestainoClinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "S. Maria Della Misericordia" University Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale (ASUFC), Udine, Italy.
Tommaso SimonciniDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Giampiero CapobiancoDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Gynecologic and Obstetric Clinic, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy.
Alfredo ErcoliDepartment of Human Pathology in Adult and Childhood "G. Barresi", Unit of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
Giovanni ScambiaUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Giuseppe Vizzielli *Medical Area Department (DAME), in Department of Medicine (DMED), University of Udine, Piazzale S. Maria Della Misericordia 15, Udine, Italy. giuseppevizzielli@yahoo.it.
Giuseppe Campagna *Gynecological Surgery Unit, Dipartimento Centro di Eccellenza Donna e Bambino Nascente, Ospedale Isola Tiberina-Gemelli Isola, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAlthough sacral colpopexy is considered the gold standard for correcting apical prolapse, it is associated with extended operative times and surgical complications. An alternative surgical approach is currently being investigated. This meta-analysis aims to summarize and compare the available data on laparoscopic sacral colpopexy (LSCP) and laparoscopic lateral suspension (LLS) as per the Dubuisson technique.

methodsA systematic search of PubMed (MEDLINE) and Google Scholar was conducted from the inception of each database until December 2024. Studies comparing LSCP and LLS on at least one efficacy outcome selected. Objective or subjective success rate, surgery-related data and follow-up data were extracted. Results were pooled using a random-effect meta-analysis.

resultsA total of 6 studies were included. The meta-analysis did not report statistical differences between LSCP and LLS in terms of apical prolapse [OR = 1.24; CI 95% (0.61, 2.52); I

conclusionsLLS provides similar outcomes to LSCP for apical and anterior prolapse in selected cases. However, limited long-term data and few studies on advanced prolapse prevent LLS from being declared an equally effective alternative at this time. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024537270.

Indexed as

Gynecologic Surgical ProceduresLaparoscopyPelvic Organ ProlapseFemaleHumansOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsSacrumTreatment OutcomeLaparoscopyLateral suspensionMeshMinimally invasive surgeryPelvic organ prolapseSacral colpopexySacral suspension

Identifiers

PMID41042324
PMCPMC12705715

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.