Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31529008›Full record

Trial reportJAMA2019

Effect of Vaginal Mesh Hysteropexy vs Vaginal Hysterectomy With Uterosacral Ligament Suspension on Treatment Failure in Women With Uterovaginal Prolapse: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Charles W Nager, Anthony G Visco, Holly E Richter, Charles R Rardin, Rebecca G Rogers, Heidi S Harvie, Halina M Zyczynski, Marie Fidela R Paraiso, Donna Mazloomdoost, Scott Grey and 3 more

Erratum issued 2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 37 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
9.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT01802281 nacompletednot on this map

A Randomized Trial of Vaginal Surgery for Uterovaginal Prolapse: Vaginal Hysterectomy With Native Tissue Vault Suspension vs. Mesh Hysteropexy Suspension

TypeinterventionalSponsorNICHD Pelvic Floor Disorders NetworkRan2013 to 2025Enrolled183ConditionsUterovaginal ProlapseArmsUterosacral ligament suspension, Uphold® LITE
NCT07218016 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Accelerometer Measured Early Recovery After Prolapse Surgery

TypeinterventionalSponsorNICHD Pelvic Floor Disorders NetworkRan2025 to 2028Enrolled288ConditionsPelvic Organ Prolapse, Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP), Pelvic Organ Prolapse Vaginal Surgery, Pelvic Organ Prolapse, Patient EducationArmsPostoperative Exercise regimen
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Transvaginal mesh or grafts or native tissue repair for vaginal prolapse.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.

Charles W NagerObstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, UC San Diego Health, San Diego, California.
Anthony G ViscoDuke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Holly E RichterDepartment of OB/GYN, University of Alabama at Birmingham.
Charles R RardinAlpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
Rebecca G RogersUniversity of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
Heidi S HarvieUniversity of Pennsylvania, Flourtown.
Halina M ZyczynskiDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Womens Research Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Marie Fidela R ParaisoCleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio.
Donna MazloomdoostNational Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Scott GreyResearch Triangle International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Amaanti SridharResearch Triangle International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Dennis WallaceResearch Triangle International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
NICHD Pelvic Floor Disorders Network
RTI International · USBrown University · USCleveland Clinic · USDuke Medical Center · USEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development · USMagee-Womens Research Institute · USThe University of Texas at Austin · USUC San Diego Health System · USUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

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
Pelvic Floor Disorders Network Data Coordinating Center (U01)U01HD069031 · NICHD · RESEARCH TRIANGLE INSTITUTE · PI GANTZ, MARIE G · 2011 to 2015
$19.7M
Perioperative Pelvic Floor Rehab: A Rrandomized TrialU10HD041261 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI RICHTER, HOLLY E · 2001 to 2015
$5.1M
UNC Pelvic Floor Disorders Research CollaborativeU10HD041267 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI VISCO, ANTHONY G · 2001 to 2015
$5.0M
Pelvic Floor Disorders NetworkU10HD054214 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI LUKACZ, EMILY S. · 2006 to 2015
$3.3M
The Cleveland Clinic Clinical SiteU10HD054215 · NICHD · CLEVELAND CLINIC LERNER COM-CWRU · PI BARBER, MATTHEW D · 2006 to 2015
$3.2M
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
Pelvic Floor Disorders Network Clinical Sites (U10)U10HD069010 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI ARYA, LILY A · 2011 to 2015
$1.7M
Brown/WIH Pelvic Floor Disorders Network SiteU10HD069013 · NICHD · WOMEN AND INFANTS HOSPITAL-RHODE ISLAND · PI SUNG, VIVIAN W · 2011 to 2015
$1.6M
Pittsburgh Pelvic Floor Research ProgramU10HD069006 · NICHD · MAGEE-WOMEN'S RES INST AND FOUNDATION · PI ZYCZYNSKI, HALINA M · 2011 to 2015
$1.6M
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
NICHD NIH HHS U01 HD069031NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD041261NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD041267NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD054215NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD069006NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD069010NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD069013NICHD NIH HHS U10 HD069025NICHD NIH HHS U24 HD069031NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD041261NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD054214NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD054215NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD069006NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD069010
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Vaginal hysterectomy with suture apical suspension is commonly performed for uterovaginal prolapse. Transvaginal mesh hysteropexy is an alternative option. Objective: To compare the efficacy and adverse events of vaginal hysterectomy with suture apical suspension and transvaginal mesh hysteropexy. Design, Setting, Participants: At 9 clinical sites in the US Pelvic Floor Disorders Network, 183 postmenopausal women with symptomatic uterovaginal prolapse were enrolled in a randomized superiority clinical trial between April 2013 and February 2015. The study was designed for primary analysis when the last randomized participant reached 3 years of follow-up in February 2018. Interventions: Ninety-three women were randomized to undergo vaginal mesh hysteropexy and 90 were randomized to undergo vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary treatment failure composite outcome (re-treatment of prolapse, prolapse beyond the hymen, or prolapse symptoms) was evaluated with survival models. Secondary outcomes included operative outcomes and adverse events, and were evaluated with longitudinal models or contingency tables as appropriate. Results: A total of 183 participants (mean age, 66 years) were randomized, 175 were included in the trial, and 169 (97%) completed the 3-year follow-up. The primary outcome was not significantly different among women who underwent hysteropexy vs hysterectomy through 48 months (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.38-1.02]; P = .06; 36-month adjusted failure incidence, 26% vs 38%). Mean (SD) operative time was lower in the hysteropexy group vs the hysterectomy group (111.5 [39.7] min vs 156.7 [43.9] min; difference, -45.2 [95% CI, -57.7 to -32.7]; P = <.001). Adverse events in the hysteropexy vs hysterectomy groups included mesh exposure (8% vs 0%), ureteral kinking managed intraoperatively (0% vs 7%), granulation tissue after 12 weeks (1% vs 11%), and suture exposure after 12 weeks (3% vs 21%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among women with symptomatic uterovaginal prolapse undergoing vaginal surgery, vaginal mesh hysteropexy compared with vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension did not result in a significantly lower rate of the composite prolapse outcome after 3 years. However, imprecision in study results precludes a definitive conclusion, and further research is needed to assess whether vaginal mesh hysteropexy is more effective than vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01802281.

Indexed as

Surgical MeshAgedFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansHysterectomy, VaginalKaplan-Meier EstimateLigamentsMiddle AgedPostmenopausePostoperative ComplicationsTreatment OutcomeUterine ProlapseUterusVagina

Identifiers

PMID31529008
PMCPMC6749543
OpenAlexW2973277500

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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 Socratic graph.