ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2025
Long-Term Outcome of Anterior-Apical Mesh (Surelift) Versus Anterior Colporrhaphy and Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation in Advanced Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2025. 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.
- Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation for Hysteropexy: Does Concomitant Anterior and Posterior Fixation Using a Posterior Approach Route Improve Surgical Outcomes?International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study first aims to compare the outcomes of Surelift (anterior-apical transvaginal mesh) and sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSF) with anterior repair using objective and subjective cure rates. Second, to compare the quality of life and its major and minor complications. MATERIAL AND
methodsA retrospective study was conducted between December 2011 and January 2020. Patients with symptomatic stage ≥ 3 anterior or apical prolapse were included. Those who had prior POP mesh and who were unfit for surgery were excluded. Preoperative evaluation included history and physical exam, urodynamic studies, and validated questionnaires (IIQ-7, UDI-6, POPDI-6) at baseline, 1, 3, and 5 years later.
resultsOne hundred eighty-one patients were included: 98 underwent anterior-apical transvaginal mesh and 83 had SSF with anterior colporrhaphy (SSF+A). Anterior-apical transvaginal mesh and SSF+A patients had mean follow-up periods of 83.5 ± 6.1 and 91.6 ± 39 months, respectively. At 1 year, no statistically significant difference was noted in objective and subjective cure rates between anterior-apical transvaginal mesh (96.8% and 94.7%) and SSF+A (89.9% and 88.6%). However, after 3 and 5 years, anterior-apical transvaginal mesh showed superior results with objective cure rates of 94.1% and 89.1%, respectively, compared to 80% and 64.4% for SSF+A (p = 0.008). At 3 and 5 years, anterior-apical transvaginal mesh had 92.9% and 85.9% subjective cure rates compared to SSF's 77.1% and 60%, respectively (p = 0.005).
conclusionsThe long-term follow-up showed that native tissue repair was strongly associated with increased risk of recurrence compared to the anterior-apical mesh with minor complications in both groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40088265What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.