ReviewCurrent urology reports2025
Evaluation and Management of Recurrent Pelvic Organ Prolapse.
Review in Current urology reports, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewPostoperative prolapse recurrence is not uncommon, despite advances in surgical options and techniques. There is no consensus on the optimal approach to guide counseling and management for patients with recurrent prolapse following surgical repair. RECENT
findingsRisk factors for postoperative prolapse recurrence include patient factors, pelvic floor factors, and surgical approach. There are various definitions for prolapse recurrence, including anatomic measures and patient reported symptoms. The highest rate of prolapse recurrence is seen within two years of initial surgery. Retreatment for prolapse requires shared decision-making, considering the patient's symptomatology, anatomy, comorbidities, and long-term goals. There is limited data regarding the long-term success of reoperation for pelvic organ prolapse. Anatomic and patient factors that affect surgical re-treatment outcomes for recurrent prolapse are not well understood. Standardized definitions of prolapse recurrence and more long-term data are necessary to inform evidence-based treatment decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41060559What 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.