ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2026
Comparative Effectiveness of Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension, Pectopexy and Sacrocolpopexy for Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Propensity-Weighted Retrospective Cohort Study.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe objective was to compare anatomical and safety outcomes of laparoscopic lateral suspension (LS), pectopexy (PP), and sacrocolpopexy (SCP) for apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in a retrospective comparative cohort using propensity score weighting. The cohort consisted of consecutive women undergoing LS, PP or SCP at a tertiary referral centre between 2017 and 2023.
methodsConfounding by indication was addressed using a multinomial propensity score with inverse probability of treatment weighting; covariate balance was assessed by standardised mean differences. Weighted regression models with robust standard errors were used; primary-outcome pairwise comparisons were Holm corrected. Sensitivity analyses included overlap weighting, entropy balancing and doubly-robust estimation. The main outcome measures were 12-month apical anatomical success; perioperative outcomes; Clavien-Dindo complications; mesh-related events; reoperation; time to recurrence.
resultsOf 188 women (58 with SCP, 63 with PP, 67 with LS), 12-month apical success was 74.1%, 73.0%, 80.6%, with no significant pairwise differences (PP vs SCP: aOR 0.80, 95% CI 0.33-1.93; LS vs SCP: aOR 1.42, 95% CI 0.56-3.60; global p = 0.437). Post hoc analysis indicated 80% power only for large effects (≈18 percentage points). LS required longer operative time (+44.2 min, p < 0.001); PP had modestly higher blood loss (+23.6 ml, p = 0.038). Complications, mesh exposure, reoperation and time-to-recurrence did not differ. Findings were robust across sensitivity analyses.
conclusionsNo significant differences in 12-month apical success or safety were detected among women undergoing SCP, PP or LS after adjustment; LS required a longer operative time. Wide confidence intervals and absence of a prespecified non-inferiority margin preclude any equivalence claim; short-term findings cannot be extrapolated to long-term durability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42758296What 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.