ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2026
Long-term clinical outcomes of ischial spine fascia fixation compared with sacrospinous ligament fixation: a prospective cohort study over 10 years.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare the long-term effects of ischial spine fascia fixation (ISFF) and sacrospinous ligament fixation (SLFF).
methodsIn a single-center prospective cohort study of 42 patients, 22 patients underwent ISFF and 20 patients underwent SSLF. The follow-up period of more than 10 years included a total of 32 patients. The main outcomes are the subjective failure and retreatment rates.
resultsFifteen of twenty patients (75%) in the SSLF group and seventeen of twenty-two patients (77.3%) in the ISFF group completed the last follow-up with a median follow-up time of 133 (120-156) months. The ISFF and SSLF groups achieved estimated subjective failure rate of 40.35% and 31.62%, respectively, at the postoperative period of 10 years. The retreatment rates for both the ISFF and SSLF groups remained consistent at 5 and 10-year intervals after surgery, with corresponding percentages of 16.49% and 11.11%. While the ISFF group exhibited marginally elevated subjective failure rates and re-treatment rates compared to the SSLF group, no statistically significant difference was observed. No patients had pain in the leg or hip over 10-year follow-up.
conclusionISFF is a safe approach that showed no statistically significant difference in recurrence results and improved quality of life scores compared to SSLF. Due to the relatively small sample size (N = 42), this study is underpowered to definitively claim equivalence or non-inferiority between the two procedures. This long-term study on native tissue transvaginal repair for POP indicates the clinical use of ISFF is safe and long-lasting.
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.