SynthesisActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2025
Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh for pelvic organ prolapse: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh for pelvic organ prolapse: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Pooled it
- vNOTES Versus Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension for Advanced Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Single-Center, Single-Surgeon Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Single-port laparoscopic lateral suspension with total versus subtotal hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse: a prospective comparative study.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Comparative Outcomes of Uterus-Preserving and Hysterectomy Approaches in Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Uterine-Sparing vNOTES vs. laparoscopic lateral suspension for pelvic organ prolapse repair: a prospective comparative study of feasibility and early outcomes.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension for Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Systematic Review of Current Evidence on Clinical Outcomes and Safety.International journal of women's health · 2026Review
- A Cohort-Based Comparative Study of Three Minimally Invasive Apical Prolapse Surgeries: Sacropexy, Pectopexy, and Lateral Suspension.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Fascial fixation versus non-fixation in vNOTES lateral suspension after vaginal hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse.Annals of Saudi medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionLaparoscopic lateral suspension (LLS) with mesh is an alternative treatment for pelvic organ prolapse, offering enhanced apical vaginal suspension. This review aims to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of LLS for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse through systematic review and meta-analysis. MATERIAL AND
methodsOriginal studies including randomized controlled trials, prospective, or retrospective studies reporting outcomes on the efficacy and safety of LLS with mesh for pelvic organ prolapse were retrieved from PubMed and Web of Science up to November 30, 2024. Case reports, reviews, and non-English literature were excluded. Primary outcomes included anatomical and subjective success rates. Secondary outcomes were recurrence rates, reoperation rates, and complications. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed where appropriate. This study has been registered in PROSPERO with the registration number CRD42024620632.
resultsEighteen studies (3 randomized controlled trials, 9 prospective studies, and 6 retrospective studies) involving 1430 LLS patients with a mean follow-up of 20.27 months were included. The pooled anatomical success rates for the apical and anterior compartments were 92.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 89.8-95.1) and 86.9% (95% CI: 81.4-90.9), respectively. The subjective success rate was 88.9% (95% CI: 85.3-91.7). The pooled recurrence rate was 9.6% (95% CI: 7.0-13.2), and the reoperation rate was 6.2% (95% CI: 4.3-8.9). Overall complication and mesh-related complication rates were 5.7% (95% CI: 3.4-9.4) and 1.9% (95% CI: 1.0-3.8), respectively. The incidence of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications was only 1.9% (16/848).
conclusionsLLS demonstrates favorable anatomical and subjective success rates, indicating its reliability and safety for pelvic organ prolapse treatment. However, longer follow-up is needed to validate its long-term efficacy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.