ReviewNeurourology and urodynamics2026
How Can We Improve the Assessment and Indifferent Outcomes From Pelvic Organ Prolapse Management From Conservative and Surgical Therapies? ICI-RS 2025.
Review in Neurourology and urodynamics, 2026. 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.
- How Can We Improve the Assessment and Indifferent Outcomes From Pelvic Organ Prolapse Management From Conservative and Surgical Therapies? ICI-RS 2025.Neurourology and urodynamics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPelvic organ prolapse is a common condition and many women seek surgical treatment for prolapse symptoms. However, recurrence of prolapse after surgical treatment is common. A think tank was held at ICI-RS 2025 to discuss how the assessment and indifferent results from conservative and surgical management can be improved.
methodsData were collected and presented on identification of women at risk of prolapse recurrence after surgery, understanding patient goals and expectations, optimising lifestyle interventions, pelvic floor muscle training, pessary management, and surgical care. Discussions identified knowledge gaps and proposed research studies that could advance knowledge to improve treatment outcomes.
resultsThere is insufficient information to understand the assessment of prolapse treatment outcomes; examination findings do not necessarily correlate with symptoms. Further research is needed to understand if patient-reported goal attainment is superior to patient-reported outcome measures, including measures of patient satisfaction. There is insufficient information on the value of lifestyle adjustments and pelvic floor muscle training as prehabilitation to improve surgical outcomes. The place of pessary management in an optimally integrated prolapse treatment pathway is unclear and the role that pessaries may have in anatomical modelling of prolapse is not fully understood. Further research into adjuncts to improve native tissue repair as alternatives to polypropylene mesh is needed to optimise surgical outcome.
conclusionFurther research into understanding what represents treatment, cure, and optimising conservative and surgical treatments is of high priority to improve pelvic organ prolapse treatment outcomes. The utility of preoperative rehabilitation requires investigation. Developing an optimised pessary care pathway and continued surgical innovation are required to ensure progress in reducing prolapse symptom recurrence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.