Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38976021›Full record

ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024

Recurrent pelvic organ prolapse after hysterectomy; a 10-year national follow-up study.

Tea Kuittinen, Maarit Mentula, Sari Tulokas, Tea Brummer, Jyrki Jalkanen, Eija Tomas, Juha Mäkinen, Jari Sjöberg, Päivi Härkki, Päivi Rahkola-Soisalo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors.

Tea KuittinenWomen's Clinic, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 2, 00290, Helsinki, Finland. tea.kuittinen@fimnet.fi.ORCID 0000-0001-8940-376X
Maarit MentulaWomen's Clinic, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 2, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Sari TulokasWomen's Clinic, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 2, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Tea BrummerCentral Hospital Østfold, Grålum, Norway.
Jyrki JalkanenHospital Nova of Central Finland, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Eija TomasUniversity of Tampere and Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland.
Juha MäkinenUniversity of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Jari SjöbergWomen's Clinic, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 2, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Päivi HärkkiWomen's Clinic, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 2, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Päivi Rahkola-SoisaloWomen's Clinic, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 2, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.

Funding

Helsingin ja Uudenmaan Sairaanhoitopiiri grant from the Women's Clinic
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeHysterectomy may be a risk factor for pelvic organ prolapse (POP). We assessed the risk of recurrent POP (operations and visits) after hysterectomy among women with previous POP. We also studied patient and operation related risk factors for POP recurrence.

methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 1697 women having previous POP diagnosis or POP at the time of hysterectomy (FINHYST 2006 cohort). Follow-up was until the end of 2016. The data was derived from the Finnish National Care register linked to the cohort. Hysterectomy approaches and other demographics were compared to the risk of a prolapse diagnosis and/or surgery. Cox regression model was used to identify hazard ratios.

resultsFollowing hysterectomy, a total of 280 women (16.5%) had a POP reoperation and 359 (21.2%) had an outpatient visit due to POP. Vaginal vault prolapse repair was the most common POP reoperation (n = 181, 10.7%), followed by anterior wall repair (n = 120, 7.1%). Median time to POP reoperation was 3.7 years. Hysterectomy approach did not affect reoperations or visits. Previous cesarean section and anterior repair during hysterectomy were associated with decreased risk, whereas concomitant sacrospinous fixation and uterus prolapse as the main indication led to increased risk of anterior/vault prolapse reoperations. Concomitant posterior repair decreased posterior reoperations and visits, but uterus weight over 500 g caused a fivefold increased risk of posterior prolapse visit. Residential status was associated with elevated risk of any POP reoperations and visits.

conclusionsApproximately one out of five women suffering from POP ensue POP reoperation or visit after hysterectomy. These high rates are independent on hysterectomy approach, but probably indicate that hysterectomy may worsen previous pelvic floor dysfunction.

Indexed as

HysterectomyPelvic Organ ProlapseRecurrenceReoperationAdultAgedFemaleFinlandFollow-Up StudiesHumansMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsProportional Hazards ModelsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsUterine ProlapseHysterectomyLaparoscopyPelvic organ prolapseSurgical TechniquesUrogynecology

Identifiers

PMID38976021
PMCPMC11485282

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.