CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 42Pelvic floor disorders treatmentsUterine Myomas and TreatmentsSexual function and dysfunction studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Operation for pelvic organ prolapse: a follow-up study

Open access
Tegerstedt, Gunilla, Hammarström, Margareta·2004·Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
DOI 10.1111/j.0001-6349.2004.00468.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Objective. Long‐term results of surgery for pelvic organ prolapse in terms of objective and subjective cure rates, postoperative complications and side‐effects were studied retrospectively. Methods. Two hundred and sixty‐nine women underwent surgery between 1986 and 1988 and were invited to a follow‐up visit in 1998–99. One hundred and twenty‐eight (47%) women attended the follow‐up. In the time between surgery and follow‐up, 67 (25%) women had died. The medical records were reviewed for women not attending follow‐up (n = 131), revealing a higher age and a more severe prolapse in the lost to follow‐up group. Results. The subjective cure rate, with cure of all symptoms of pelvic organ prolapse, was 46% (n = 59). The objective cure rate, with satisfactory anatomic outcome, was 56% (n = 72). If perfect results had been attained in the women who did not undergo follow‐up examination, the subjective and objective cure rates would be 73% and 79%, respectively. Previous prolapse surgery, a traumatic delivery, urinary incontinence and a prolapse stage III or more seemed to be risk factors for an adverse outcome. Conclusions. In evaluating the cure rate of pelvic floor surgery not only the anatomic outcome should be studied but also the outcome in terms of side‐effects and/or symptoms as resolved, persistent or new onset. An unsatisfactory anatomic outcome was not necessarily associated with symptoms. The modest cure rate after surgery may be due to the aggravation with time of pelvic floor disorder, this confounding the results of surgery.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.0001-6349.2004.00468.x

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Surgery for POP is known to have a high recurrence rate of 36%.

    “However, surgery for POP is known to have a high recurrence rate of 36% (Tegerstedt and Hammarstr€ om 2004, Diez-Itza et al. 2007, Fialkow et al. 2008, Friedman et al. 2018).”

    From Risk factors for the recurrence of pelvic organ prolapse: a meta-analysis (2023) · cites this paper as Tegerstedt and Hammarstr€ om 2004

    The Results report a substantial rate of persistent or recurrent anatomic prolapse: 56 of 128 women (44%) at a median follow-up of 11.3 years. The paper supports the general point that recurrence can be high, but it does not report the attributed 36% rate. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Genetic factors, parity, obesity, and birth-induced injury during delivery are risk factors for POP development and recurrence after operation.

    “In recent years, it has been reported that genetic factors, parity, obesity, birth-induced injury during delivery, etc. are risk factors for POP development and recurrence after operation (Tegerstedt and Hammarstr€ om 2004, Diez-Itza, Aizpitarte and Becerro 2007, Delancey et al. 2008, Fritel et al. 2009, Friedman et al. 2018).”

    From Risk factors for the recurrence of pelvic organ prolapse: a meta-analysis (2023) · cites this paper as Tegerstedt and Hammarstr€ om 2004

    The paper’s introductory passage identifies multiparity, traumatic delivery and genetic predisposition as suggested risk factors for developing prolapse. Its multivariate-results section also associates complicated delivery with postoperative recurrence. It does not identify obesity as a risk factor, and it does not establish parity or genetic predisposition as predictors of recurrence after surgery; Table IV’s BMI recurrence estimate has a confidence interval spanning 1. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Risk factors for POP include age, BMI, parity, family history of POP, levator avulsion, diabetes mellitus, and other chronic diseases.

    “A series of studies have shown that risk factors for POP include age, BMI, parity, family history of POP, levator avulsion, diabetes mellitus and other chronic diseases (Tegerstedt and Hammarstr€ om 2004, Diez-Itza et al. 2007, Fialkow et al. 2008, Denman et al. 2008, Salvatore et al. 2009, Vergeldt et al. 2015).”

    From Risk factors for the recurrence of pelvic organ prolapse: a meta-analysis (2023) · cites this paper as Tegerstedt and Hammarstr€ om 2004

    The paper’s Abstract (page not specified in our copy) lists age, multiparity, and genetic predisposition as suggested risk factors for genital prolapse, supporting those parts of the claim; genetic predisposition is related to, but not identical to, family history. The Results report BMI for women followed after surgery but do not establish it as a risk factor for developing prolapse. Our copy does not identify levator avulsion, diabetes mellitus, or other chronic diseases as risk factors. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Three recurrence studies did not apply the limitation of the number of risk factors to 10% of the number of events.

    “Three studies did not apply the limitation of the number of risk factors to be 10% of the number of events.”

    From Risk factors for primary pelvic organ prolapse and prolapse recurrence: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis (2022) · cites this paper as [42]

    The Prognostic factors section (p. 4) reports 56 recurrence events and evaluates more than five preoperative factors; the Statistics section (p. 2) says multivariate logistic regression was used. But the paper does not state how many factors entered the recurrence model at once, so its failure to apply a limit of one factor per ten events cannot be established from our copy. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Constipation was reported by 3 studies and was not statistically significant for pelvic organ prolapse recurrence (n=3, OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.67-1.36).

    “Constipation was reported by 3 studies and was not statistically significant (n¼3, OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.67e1.36)”

    From Risk factors for primary pelvic organ prolapse and prolapse recurrence: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis (2022) · cites this paper as [42]

    Table IV (Prognostic factors, p. 4) reports no clear association between preoperative defecation difficulty and prolapse recurrence: RR 1.1 (95% CI 0.7–1.7). This is related to the claim about constipation, but the paper is one follow-up study and does not report a three-study pooled OR of 0.95 (95% CI 0.67–1.36). (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 17 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Beck RP, 1983, Principles and practice of clinical gynaecology, 677
  2. Stanton SL, 1992, Gynecology, 437
  3. Timmonen S, 1968, Genital prolapse, Ann Chir Gynaecol Fenn, 57, 363
  4. Kleinbaum DG, 1982, Epidemiologic research: priciples and quantitative methods, 299
  5. 10.1111/j.1600-0412.1989.tb07836.x · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Tegerstedt, G., & Hammarström, M.
Affiliations
Karolinska Institutet (SE)
Corresponding author
Tegerstedt, Gunilla
ORCID
Tegerstedt, Gunilla
Venue
Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-07-15
Volume
83
Issue
8
Pages
758-763
ISSN
  • 0001-6349 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0412
DOI
10.1111/j.0001-6349.2004.00468.x
OpenAlex
W2129558042
Cited by
42
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Vårdalstiftelsen
  • Karolinska Institutet
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Uterine Myomas and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
Keywords
pelvic organ prolapse, pelvic floor surgery, cure rate, anatomical outcomes, postoperative complications, long-term follow-up, risk factors, urinary incontinence, traumatic delivery, prolapse stage, loss to follow-up
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Medical Records, Middle Aged, Postoperative Complications, Retrospective Studies, Sweden, Uterine Prolapse, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review