Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41213491›Full record

Trial reportAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2026

Outcomes by frailty and mobility in older patients undergoing major urogynecologic surgery: a planned supplementary study of the apical suspension repair for vault prolapse in a three-arm randomized (ASPIRe) trial.

Elisabeth Erekson, Shawn A Menefee, Ryan Whitworth, Selen Gizlice, Halina M Zyczynski, David D Rahn, Cindy L Amundsen, Vivian W Sung, Lily A Arya, Cecile A Ferrando and 4 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

14 authors.

Elisabeth EreksonDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA. Electronic address: elisabethereksonmd@gmail.com.
Shawn A MenefeeDivision of Urogynecology and Pelvic Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, San Diego, CA.
Ryan WhitworthRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Selen GizliceRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Halina M ZyczynskiDivision of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Womens Research Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
David D RahnDivision of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX.
Cindy L AmundsenDivision of Urogynecology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC.
Vivian W SungThe Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI.
Lily A AryaDivision of Urogynecology and Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Cecile A FerrandoCenter for Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.
Donna MazloomdoostEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, MD.
Sonia ThomasRTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Holly E RichterDivision of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL.
Eunice Kennedy Shriver NICHD Pelvic Floor Disorders Network

Funding

Pelvic Floor Disorders Network Data Coordinating Center Administrative Supplement: ODSS CDE FundingU24HD069031 · NICHD · RESEARCH TRIANGLE INSTITUTE · PI MARIE G GANTZ · 2016 to 2026
$35.8M
The Cleveland Clinic Clinical SiteU10HD054215 · NICHD · CLEVELAND CLINIC LERNER COM-CWRU · PI BARBER, MATTHEW D · 2006 to 2015
$3.2M
Brown/WIH Pelvic Floor Disorders Network Site (UG1)UG1HD069013 · NICHD · WOMEN AND INFANTS HOSPITAL-RHODE ISLAND · PI Vivian W Sung · 2016 to 2026
$3.1M
Pelvic Floor Disorders Network 2021UG1HD054241 · NICHD · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI David Dwight Rahn · 2016 to 2026
$3.0M
Pelvic Floor Disorders Network Clinical Sites (UG1)UG1HD069010 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Heidi S Harvie · 2016 to 2026
$3.0M
Pelvic Floor Disorders Network Clinical Site Application: The San Diego PelvicFloor ConsortiumUG1HD054214 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI EMILY S. LUKACZ, Shawn A Menefee · 2016 to 2026
$2.9M
Duke University Medical Center (DUMC) Pelvic Floor Disorders Network (PFDN) Clinical SiteUG1HD041267 · NICHD · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI NAZEMA Y SIDDIQUI · 2016 to 2026
$2.8M
RCT of Hypnotherapy vs Tpolterodine for OAB: Voiding and Brain Activation ChangesU10HD069025 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIS CTR · PI ROGERS, REBECCA GLENN · 2011 to 2015
$1.6M
Pittsburgh Pelvic Floor Research ProgramUG1HD069006 · NICHD · MAGEE-WOMEN'S RES INST AND FOUNDATION · PI ZYCZYNSKI, HALINA M · 2016 to 2021
$1.5M
University of Alabama at Birmingham: Pelvic Floor Disorders NetworkUG1HD041261 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI RICHTER, HOLLY E · 2016 to 2021
$1.4M
NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD054215NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD069025NICHD NIH HHS U24 HD069031NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD041261NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD041267NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD054214NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD054241NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD069006NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD069010NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD069013
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe impact of frailty and compromised mobility on immediate postoperative complications, geriatric outcomes, and treatment failure after prolapse surgery remains uncertain. The objective of this study was to prospectively characterize frailty and mobility and their impact on immediate postoperative complications, geriatric outcomes, and treatment success in older patients undergoing major urogynecologic surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. STUDY

designA nested prospective cohort study within a 3-arm randomized clinical trial was conducted at 9 clinical sites in 146 participants. Participants aged ≥65 years with symptomatic vaginal vault prolapse underwent baseline assessments of frailty and compromised mobility. Frailty was measured using the Robinson Frailty Index. The Robinson Frailty Index score ranges from 0 to 7 and scores ≥2 were considered prefrail/frail. Compromised mobility was defined as Timed Up and Go ≥15 seconds, use of an assistive device, or observed gait difficulties. The primary outcome was immediate postoperative moderate to severe adverse events assessed according to the Clavien-Dindo Severity Classification (grade≥II). Geriatric-specific outcomes included 30-day postoperative complications, need for increased social support assessed 6 weeks postoperatively, falls, new admission to skilled nursing facilities, all-cause hospital admissions, and mortality. Treatment outcome was time to composite treatment failure. Geriatric and treatment outcomes were assessed biannually for 36 up to 60 months.

results146 supplemental study participants underwent randomized prolapse surgery in the main trial: 50 in the transvaginal native tissue repair, 47 in the abdominal sacral colpopexy, and 48 in the transvaginal mesh repair arms. Compared with nonfrail subjects, prefrail/frail participants experienced no difference in geriatric-specific outcomes. Prefrail/frail participants living alone before surgery were more likely to require support (family/friends or assistance) in the first 6 weeks after surgery (19% vs 6%, P=.04). Prefrail/frail and compromised mobility participants had a shorter time to surgical treatment failure than did nonfrail or noncompromised patients (frail vs nonfrail adjusted hazard ratio, 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.2, 3.6).

conclusionDespite measurable frailty or compromised mobility, many older patients underwent prolapse surgery with few complications; however, enhanced social support was needed in the first 6 weeks after surgery. Treatment failure was higher in patients with preoperative frailty, suggesting that frailty is important to incorporate in surgical treatment planning for the correction of pelvic organ prolapse in older patients.

Indexed as

Frail ElderlyFrailtyGynecologic Surgical ProceduresMobility LimitationPelvic Organ ProlapsePostoperative ComplicationsAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGeriatric AssessmentHumansProspective StudiesTreatment Outcomefrailtymobilitynative tissue repairpelvic organ prolapsesacrocolpopexysacrospinous ligament fixationtransvaginal mesh

Identifiers

PMID41213491
PMCPMC12790791

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.