ReviewInternational urogynecology journal2026
Patient Risk Factors for Incidental Pathology After Uterovaginal Surgery for Apical Prolapse: Systematic Review and Global Expert Consensus Statements.
Review 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisUterus preservation is increasingly used for uterovaginal prolapse (U-POP) repair despite ongoing concerns regarding future uterine, cervical, and adnexal pathology. We evaluated incidental pathology rates, associated risk factors, and created global consensus statements.
methodsFollowing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we searched for studies including women undergoing U-POP surgery with uterus present in ≥ 50% and cohorts of ≥ 30 participants exploring risk factors for pathology. Risk of bias was assessed using Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions and evidence certainty using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. Meta-analyses were performed on the proportions of incidental pathology. Findings informed a modified Delphi process resulting in consensus statements on best practice.
resultsOf 4,148 screened records, 33 studies met the eligibility criteria. Meta-analysis showed that the pooled prevalence of malignant pathology at the time of surgery was 0.6% (95% CI 0.0-1.0%; I
conclusionsIncidental pathology in U-POP surgery is rare (< 1%), and no single risk factor reliably predicts malignancy. Preoperative screening does not show significant reduced malignancy rates in uterus-preserving surgery. Global consensus statements offer guidance on when hysterectomy should be considered over uterus preservation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42811185What 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.