ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2026
vNOTES high uterosacral ligament suspension versus laparoscopic lateral suspension in the management of vaginal vault prolapse: initial experience in a single tertiary center.
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: The optimal technique for vaginal vault prolapse correction has yet to be identified. This study aimed to evaluate the anatomic and functional outcomes of women who underwent vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension (vNOTES HUSLS) or laparoscopic lateral suspension (LLS). Materials and methods: This retrospective study included symptomatic women with stage ≥2 vault prolapse who underwent vNOTES HUSLS or LLS between January 2019 and June 2022 at a tertiary center. The surgical efficacy, postoperative outcomes, complication rates, and recurrence frequencies of these procedures were compared. The primary outcomes of the study included anatomical success, patient-reported (subjective) success, and recurrence rates. Results: The study included 64 women, 32 of whom underwent vNOTES HUSLS and 32 of whom underwent LLS. Demographic characteristics and preoperative Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) values were comparable (p > 0.05). The mean Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) score did not differ significantly between the groups (1.6 ± 0.8 vs. 1.7 ± 0.7, p = 0.344). Improvements in terms of sexual function scores (p < 0.001) were observed postoperatively in both groups. No difference was observed in postoperative sexual questionnaires scores (p > 0.05). Vault suspension by vNOTES produced better results only for point Ba (most distal portion of the remaining upper anterior side of the vaginal wall) of the POP-Q score (p = 0.03). The incidence rates and types of postoperative complications and recurrences were similar between the groups. Conclusion: Both vNOTES HUSLS and LLS safely support the vault and restore the normal vaginal anatomy with similar effectiveness. Functional results were also similar and satisfactory between the groups.
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.