ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2026
Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension Versus Sacrocolpopexy: A Retrospective Cohort Study with Median 50-Month Patient-Reported and 14-Month Anatomical Outcomes.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 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
introduction and hypothesisLaparoscopic lateral suspension (LLS) has emerged as an alternative to laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (SCP) for apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Comparative patient-reported data remain limited, particularly at long-term follow-up. We compared the mid-to-long-term patient-reported and anatomical outcomes of the two procedures.
methodsWomen who underwent LLS or SCP for symptomatic apical POP (2017-2024) were retrospectively reviewed; no baseline subjective scores were available. The primary outcome was subjective improvement on the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I). Secondary outcomes were composite anatomical success (Ba < 0, Bp < 0, C ≤ -½ total vaginal length), PFDI-20, FSFI-6, de novo urinary incontinence, and perioperative parameters. Between-group comparisons and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed.
resultsOf 115 patients (LLS 57; SCP 58), 84 completed subjective assessment at a median of 50 months. PGI-I-defined improvement was more frequent after LLS than SCP, though the difference was not statistically significant (84.8% vs. 68.4%; p = 0.074). After multivariable adjustment, SCP showed lower odds of improvement (OR 0.222, 95% CI 0.060-0.828; p = 0.025). Anatomical success was similar (66.7% vs. 69.0%; p = 0.792), as were PFDI-20, FSFI-6, and de novo incontinence rates. Concomitant anterior colporrhaphy and hysterectomy were less frequent with LLS (both p < 0.001). Complications were rare; mesh exposure requiring surgery occurred only after SCP.
conclusionsLLS is a viable alternative to SCP for apical prolapse, offering comparable anatomical outcomes and favorable patient-reported results. Adequately powered prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42663641What 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.