{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,30]],"date-time":"2026-09-30T23:18:14Z","timestamp":1790810294978,"version":"4.1.0"},"reference-count":65,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"7","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,12]],"date-time":"2025-06-12T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1749686400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.springernature.com\/gp\/researchers\/text-and-data-mining"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,12]],"date-time":"2025-06-12T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1749686400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.springernature.com\/gp\/researchers\/text-and-data-mining"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Int Urogynecol J"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,7]]},"DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-025-06158-2","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,12]],"date-time":"2025-06-12T04:07:40Z","timestamp":1749701260000},"page":"1355-1372","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":5,"title":["The Safety of Robot-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Treatment: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"36","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-7698-0653","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Bagrat","family":"Grigoryan","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"George","family":"Kasyan","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Roman","family":"Shapovalenko","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Alexander","family":"Popov","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Dmitry","family":"Pushkar","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,12]]},"reference":[{"issue":"1","key":"6158_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"4","DOI":"10.1002\/nau.20798","volume":"29","author":"BT Haylen","year":"2010","unstructured":"Haylen BT, de Ridder D, Freeman RM, Swift SE, Berghmans B, Lee J, et al An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)\/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction. Neurourol Urodyn. 2010;29(1):4\u201320.","journal-title":"Neurourol Urodyn"},{"issue":"7","key":"6158_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1699","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-022-05081-0","volume":"33","author":"JA Deprest","year":"2022","unstructured":"Deprest JA, Cartwright R, Dietz HP, Brito LGO, Koch M, Allen-Brady K, et al. International Urogynecological Consultation (IUC): pathophysiology of pelvic organ prolapse (POP).\u00a0Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33(7):1699\u20131710. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-022-05081-0.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"1","key":"6158_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"13","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-017-3475-4","volume":"29","author":"T Friedman","year":"2018","unstructured":"Friedman T, Eslick GD, Dietz HP. Risk factors for prolapse recurrence: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2018;29(1):13\u201321. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-017-3475-4.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"1","key":"6158_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"15","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-021-04953-1","volume":"33","author":"LGO Brito","year":"2022","unstructured":"Brito LGO, Pereira GMV, Moalli P, Shynlova O, Manonai J, Weintraub AY, et al. Age and\/or postmenopausal status as risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse development: systematic review with meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33(1):15\u201329. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-021-04953-1.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"4","key":"6158_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"501","DOI":"10.1016\/S0029-7844(97)00058-6","volume":"89","author":"AL Olsen","year":"1997","unstructured":"Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89(4):501.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"11","key":"6158_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1815","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-013-2172-1","volume":"24","author":"MD Barber","year":"2013","unstructured":"Barber MD, Maher C. Apical prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(11):1815\u201333. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-013-2172-1.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"3","key":"6158_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"359","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijgo.2015.11.010","volume":"133","author":"PC Lim","year":"2016","unstructured":"Lim PC, Crane JT, English EJ, Farnam RW, Garza DM, Winter ML, Rozeboom JL. Multicenter analysis comparing robotic, open, laparoscopic, and vaginal hysterectomies performed by high-volume surgeons for benign indications. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016;133(3):359\u201364.","journal-title":"Int J Gynaecol Obstet"},{"issue":"2","key":"6158_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"212","DOI":"10.5468\/ogs.23226","volume":"67","author":"AO Mozon","year":"2024","unstructured":"Mozon AO, Kim JH, Lee SR. Robotic sacrocolpopexy. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2024;67(2):212\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5468\/ogs.23226.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol Sci"},{"issue":"6","key":"6158_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"531","DOI":"10.1097\/MOU.0000000000000932","volume":"31","author":"DY Pushkar","year":"2021","unstructured":"Pushkar DY, Kasyan GR, Popov AA. Robotic sacrocolpopexy in pelvic organ prolapse: a review of current literature. Curr Opin Urol. 2021;31(6):531\u20136. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/MOU.0000000000000932.","journal-title":"Curr Opin Urol"},{"key":"6158_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"n71","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.n71","volume":"372","author":"MJ Page","year":"2021","unstructured":"Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.n71.","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"6158_CR11","unstructured":"Grigoryan B, Kasyan G, Pushkar D. Robotic sacrocolpopexy in comparison with other surgical methods in pelvic organ prolapse: systematic review and meta-analysis. Prospero 2024 CRD42024515929. Available from:\u00a0https:\/\/www.crd.york.ac.uk\/prospero\/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024515929"},{"key":"6158_CR12","unstructured":"Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.1 (updated September 2020). Cochrane. 2020. Available from: https:\/\/www.training.cochrane.org\/handbook. Accessed 12 December 2022."},{"key":"6158_CR13","first-page":"14898","volume":"366","author":"JAC Sterne","year":"2019","unstructured":"Sterne JAC, Savovic\u0301 J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019;366:l4898.","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"6158_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"i4919","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.i4919","volume":"355","author":"JAC Sterne","year":"2016","unstructured":"Sterne JAC, Hern\u00e1n MA, Reeves BC, Savovic\u0301 J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016;355:i4919. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.i4919.","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"issue":"10","key":"6158_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"687","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000001226","volume":"28","author":"N Noor","year":"2022","unstructured":"Noor N, Bastawros D, Florian-Rodriguez ME, Hobson D, Eto C, Lozo S, et al. Comparing minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy with vaginal uterosacral ligament suspension: a multicenter retrospective cohort study through the Fellows' Pelvic Research Network. Urogynecology (Phila). 2022;28(10):687\u201394. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0000000000001226.","journal-title":"Urogynecology (Phila)"},{"issue":"1","key":"6158_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"173","DOI":"10.1186\/s12905-024-03011-4","volume":"24","author":"HH Chill","year":"2024","unstructured":"Chill HH, Hadizadeh A, Paya-Ten C, Leffelman A, Chang C, Moss NP, Goldberg RP. Postoperative complications and unanticipated healthcare encounters following mini-laparotomy vs. laparoscopic\/robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: a comparative retrospective study.\u00a0BMC Womens Health. 2024;24(1): 173. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12905-024-03011-4.","journal-title":"BMC Womens Health"},{"issue":"5","key":"6158_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"649","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-014-2566-8","volume":"26","author":"J Tan-Kim","year":"2015","unstructured":"Tan-Kim J, Nager CW, Grimes CL, Luber KM, Lukacz ES, Brown HW, et al. A randomized trial of vaginal mesh attachment techniques for minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(5):649\u201356. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-014-2566-8.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"1","key":"6158_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"151","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000005231","volume":"142","author":"GM Rustia","year":"2023","unstructured":"Rustia GM, Baracy MG Jr, Khair E, Hagglund KH, Aslam MF. Pain with differing insufflation pressures during robotic sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2023;142(1):151\u20139. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/AOG.0000000000005231.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"2","key":"6158_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"83","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000655","volume":"25","author":"CA Ferrando","year":"2019","unstructured":"Ferrando CA, Paraiso MFR. A prospective randomized trial comparing Restorelle Y mesh and flat mesh for laparoscopic and robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2019;25(2):83\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000655.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"6","key":"6158_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1565","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-020-04657-y","volume":"32","author":"CA Ferrando","year":"2021","unstructured":"Ferrando CA, Paraiso MFR. A prospective randomized trial comparing Restorelle\u00ae Y mesh and flat mesh for laparoscopic and robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: 24-month outcomes. Int Urogynecol J. 2021;32(6):1565\u201370. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-020-04657-y.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"8","key":"6158_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2195","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-021-04681-6","volume":"32","author":"LE Giugale","year":"2021","unstructured":"Giugale LE, Hansbarger MM, Askew AL, Visco AG, Shepherd JP, Bradley MS. Assessing pelvic organ prolapse recurrence after minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: does mesh weight matter? Int Urogynecol J. 2021;32(8):2195\u2013201. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-021-04681-6.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"4","key":"6158_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"358.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2019.09.048","volume":"222","author":"E Matanes","year":"2020","unstructured":"Matanes E, Boulus S, Lauterbach R, Amit A, Weiner Z, Lowenstein L. Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site compared with robotic multi-port sacrocolpopexy for apical compartment prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;222(4):358.e1\u201311. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ajog.2019.09.048.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"2","key":"6158_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"638","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2011.09.160","volume":"187","author":"CS Elliott","year":"2012","unstructured":"Elliott CS, Hsieh MH, Sokol ER, Comiter CV, Payne CK, Chen B. Robot-assisted versus open sacrocolpopexy: a cost-minimization analysis. J Urol. 2012;187(2):638\u201343. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.juro.2011.09.160.","journal-title":"J Urol"},{"issue":"2","key":"6158_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"401","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-019-04017-5","volume":"31","author":"A Dubinskaya","year":"2020","unstructured":"Dubinskaya A, Hernandez-Aranda D, Wakefield DB, Shepherd JP. Comparing laparoscopic and robotic sacrocolpopexy surgical outcomes with prior versus concomitant hysterectomy. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31(2):401\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-019-04017-5.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"3","key":"6158_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"158","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0b013e31824b218d","volume":"18","author":"DD Antosh","year":"2012","unstructured":"Antosh DD, Grotzke SA, McDonald MA, Shveiky D, Park AJ, Gutman RE, Sokol AI. Short-term outcomes of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic sacral colpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2012;18(3):158\u201361. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0b013e31824b218d.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"6","key":"6158_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1181","DOI":"10.1007\/s00404-012-2691-x","volume":"287","author":"N Awad","year":"2013","unstructured":"Awad N, Mustafa S, Amit A, Deutsch M, Eldor-Itskovitz J, Lowenstein L. Implementation of a new procedure: laparoscopic versus robotic sacrocolpopexy. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013;287(6):1181\u20136. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00404-012-2691-x.","journal-title":"Arch Gynecol Obstet"},{"issue":"3","key":"6158_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"113","DOI":"10.11138\/gchir\/2016.37.3.113","volume":"37","author":"G Cucinella","year":"2016","unstructured":"Cucinella G, Calagna G, Romano G, Di Buono G, Gugliotta G, Saitta S, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for apical prolapse: a case-control study.\u00a0G Chir. 2016;37(3):113\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.11138\/gchir\/2016.37.3.113.","journal-title":"G Chir"},{"issue":"1","key":"6158_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"72","DOI":"10.1007\/s11701-023-01799-1","volume":"18","author":"N Evangelopoulos","year":"2024","unstructured":"Evangelopoulos N, Nessi A, Achtari C. Minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: efficiency of robotic assistance compared to standard laparoscopy. J Robot Surg. 2024;18(1):72. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11701-023-01799-1.","journal-title":"J Robot Surg"},{"issue":"17","key":"6158_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1106","DOI":"10.1016\/j.purol.2014.09.045","volume":"24","author":"M Joubert","year":"2014","unstructured":"Joubert M, Thubert T, Lefranc JP, Vaessen C, Chartier-Kastler \u00c9, Deffieux X, Roupr\u00eat M. Comparison of functional outcomes with purely laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy in obese women. Prog Urol. 2014;24(17):1106\u201313. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.purol.2014.09.045.","journal-title":"Prog Urol"},{"issue":"5","key":"6158_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"785","DOI":"10.1007\/s11701-020-01177-1","volume":"15","author":"M Lallemant","year":"2021","unstructured":"Lallemant M, Tresch C, Puyraveau M, Delplanque S, Cosson M, Ramanah R. Evaluating the morbidity and long-term efficacy of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with and without robotic assistance for pelvic organ prolapse. J Robot Surg. 2021;15(5):785\u201392. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11701-020-01177-1.","journal-title":"J Robot Surg"},{"issue":"2","key":"6158_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"122","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0b013e31824a3995","volume":"18","author":"SJ Pulliam","year":"2012","unstructured":"Pulliam SJ, Weinstein MM, Wakamatsu MM. Minimally invasive apical sacropexy: a retrospective review of laparoscopic and robotic operating room experiences. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2012;18(2):122\u20136. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0b013e31824a3995.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"3","key":"6158_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"393","DOI":"10.1007\/s00345-011-0748-2","volume":"30","author":"J Seror","year":"2012","unstructured":"Seror J, Yates DR, Seringe E, Vaessen C, Bitker MO, Chartier-Kastler E, Roupr\u00eat M. Prospective comparison of short-term functional outcomes obtained after pure laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. World J Urol. 2012;30(3):393\u20138. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00345-011-0748-2.","journal-title":"World J Urol"},{"issue":"1","key":"6158_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"44","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0b013e3181fa44cf","volume":"17","author":"J Tan-Kim","year":"2011","unstructured":"Tan-Kim J, Menefee SA, Luber KM, Nager CW, Lukacz ES. Robotic-assisted and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: comparing operative times, costs and outcomes. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2011;17(1):44\u20139. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0b013e3181fa44cf.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"2","key":"6158_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"234","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmig.2014.10.004","volume":"22","author":"ME Tarr","year":"2015","unstructured":"Tarr ME, Brancato SJ, Cunkelman JA, Polcari A, Nutter B, Kenton K. Comparison of postural ergonomics between laparoscopic and robotic sacrocolpopexy: a pilot study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015;22(2):234\u20138. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jmig.2014.10.004.","journal-title":"J Minim Invasive Gynecol"},{"issue":"1","key":"6158_CR35","first-page":"54","volume":"17","author":"SS Chan","year":"2011","unstructured":"Chan SS, Pang SM, Cheung TH, Cheung RY, Chung TK. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse: with or without robotic assistance.\u00a0Hong Kong Med J. 2011;17(1):54\u201360.","journal-title":"Hong Kong Med J"},{"issue":"1","key":"6158_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"114","DOI":"10.1002\/ijgo.14497","volume":"161","author":"D Shigemi","year":"2023","unstructured":"Shigemi D, Okada A, Yasunaga H. Postoperative adverse events and re-treatment among patients who have undergone laparoscopic and robotic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse in Japan. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2023;161(1):114\u20139. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/ijgo.14497.","journal-title":"Int J Gynaecol Obstet"},{"issue":"6","key":"6158_CR37","first-page":"709","volume":"45","author":"H Yin","year":"2020","unstructured":"Yin H, Zeng F, Xue M, Tian X. Therapeutic effect of robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.\u00a0Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2020;45(6):709\u201314.","journal-title":"Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban"},{"issue":"5","key":"6158_CR38","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"547.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2014.07.054","volume":"211","author":"CA Unger","year":"2014","unstructured":"Unger CA, Paraiso MF, Jelovsek JE, Barber MD, Ridgeway B. Perioperative adverse events after minimally invasive abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211(5):547.e1\u20138. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ajog.2014.07.054.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"6","key":"6158_CR39","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1201","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e31818ce394","volume":"112","author":"EJ Geller","year":"2008","unstructured":"Geller EJ, Siddiqui NY, Wu JM, Visco AG. Short-term outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy compared with abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112(6):1201\u20136. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/AOG.0b013e31818ce394.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"3","key":"6158_CR40","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"532","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urology.2011.11.025","volume":"79","author":"EJ Geller","year":"2012","unstructured":"Geller EJ, Parnell BA, Dunivan GC. Robotic vs abdominal sacrocolpopexy: 44-month pelvic floor outcomes. Urology. 2012;79(3):532\u20136. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.urology.2011.11.025.","journal-title":"Urology"},{"issue":"3\u20134","key":"6158_CR41","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"100","DOI":"10.5489\/cuaj.1858","volume":"8","author":"H Li","year":"2014","unstructured":"Li H, Sammon J, Roghmann F, Sood A, Ehlert M, Sun M, et al. Utilization and perioperative outcomes of robotic vaginal vault suspension compared to abdominal or vaginal approaches for pelvic organ prolapse.\u00a0Can Urol Assoc J. 2014;8(3\u20134):100\u20136. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5489\/cuaj.1858.","journal-title":"Can Urol Assoc J"},{"issue":"7","key":"6158_CR42","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1811","DOI":"10.1002\/nau.24752","volume":"40","author":"C McFerrin","year":"2021","unstructured":"McFerrin C, Pilkington JE, Pilet H, Frilot CF, Gomelsky A. Abdominal versus robotic sacral colpopexy: a detailed analysis of outcomes. Neurourol Urodyn. 2021;40(7):1811\u20139. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/nau.24752.","journal-title":"Neurourol Urodyn"},{"issue":"1","key":"6158_CR43","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"33","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000036","volume":"20","author":"PA Nosti","year":"2014","unstructured":"Nosti PA, Umoh Andy U, Kane S, White DE, Harvie HS, Lowenstein L, Gutman RE. Outcomes of abdominal and minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: a retrospective cohort study. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2014;20(1):33\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000036.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"5","key":"6158_CR44","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"435.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2012.01.035","volume":"206","author":"NY Siddiqui","year":"2012","unstructured":"Siddiqui NY, Geller EJ, Visco AG. Symptomatic and anatomic 1-year outcomes after robotic and abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(5):435.e1\u20135. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ajog.2012.01.035.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"1","key":"6158_CR45","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"27","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000345","volume":"23","author":"M Anand","year":"2017","unstructured":"Anand M, Weaver AL, Fruth KM, Borah BJ, Klingele CJ, Gebhart JB. Perioperative complications and cost of vaginal, open abdominal, and robotic surgery for apical vaginal vault prolapse. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2017;23(1):27\u201335. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000345.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"5","key":"6158_CR46","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"297","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000389","volume":"23","author":"M Anand","year":"2017","unstructured":"Anand M, Weaver AL, Fruth KM, Trabuco EC, Gebhart JB. Symptom relief and retreatment after vaginal, open, or robotic surgery for apical vaginal prolapse. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2017;23(5):297\u2013309. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000389.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"2","key":"6158_CR47","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"87","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000120","volume":"21","author":"LH Jambusaria","year":"2015","unstructured":"Jambusaria LH, Murphy M, Lucente VR. One-year functional and anatomic outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy versus vaginal extraperitoneal colpopexy with mesh. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2015;21(2):87\u201392. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000120.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"1","key":"6158_CR48","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"268","DOI":"10.1186\/s12893-022-01702-z","volume":"22","author":"M Kusuda","year":"2022","unstructured":"Kusuda M, Kagami K, Takahashi I, Nozaki T, Sakamoto I. Comparison of transvaginal mesh surgery and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. BMC Surg. 2022;22(1):268. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12893-022-01702-z.","journal-title":"BMC Surg"},{"issue":"6","key":"6158_CR49","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"315","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000194","volume":"21","author":"LA Martin","year":"2015","unstructured":"Martin LA, Calixte R, Finamore PS. Reoperation after robotic and vaginal mesh reconstructive surgery: a retrospective cohort study. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2015;21(6):315\u20138. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000194.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"3","key":"6158_CR50","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"415","DOI":"10.1007\/s11701-019-01006-0","volume":"14","author":"JN Nguyen","year":"2020","unstructured":"Nguyen JN, Yang ST. Perioperative outcomes after robotic versus vaginal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. J Robot Surg. 2020;14(3):415\u201321. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11701-019-01006-0.","journal-title":"J Robot Surg"},{"issue":"4","key":"6158_CR51","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"230","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0b013e318299a66c","volume":"19","author":"BL Robinson","year":"2013","unstructured":"Robinson BL, Parnell BA, Sandbulte JT, Geller EJ, Connolly A, Matthews CA. Robotic versus vaginal urogynecologic surgery: a retrospective cohort study of perioperative complications in elderly women. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2013;19(4):230\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0b013e318299a66c.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"2","key":"6158_CR52","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"95","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000368","volume":"23","author":"LB Westermann","year":"2017","unstructured":"Westermann LB, Crisp CC, Mazloomdoost D, Kleeman SD, Pauls RN. Comparative perioperative pain and recovery in women undergoing vaginal reconstruction versus robotic sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2017;23(2):95\u2013100. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000368.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"2","key":"6158_CR53","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"121","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0b013e3181d690f3","volume":"16","author":"D Shveiky","year":"2010","unstructured":"Shveiky D, Iglesia CB, Sokol AI, Kudish BI, Gutman RE. Robotic sacrocolpopexy versus vaginal colpopexy with mesh: choosing the right surgery for anterior and apical prolapse. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2010;16(2):121\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0b013e3181d690f3.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"1","key":"6158_CR54","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"68","DOI":"10.1016\/j.tjog.2023.05.016","volume":"63","author":"CH Chang","year":"2024","unstructured":"Chang CH, Su TH, Lau HH. The changes in bladder function and symptoms after robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy and transvaginal mesh surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2024;63(1):68\u201372. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.tjog.2023.05.016.","journal-title":"Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"2","key":"6158_CR55","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"93","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000704","volume":"25","author":"BC Smith","year":"2019","unstructured":"Smith BC, Crisp CC, Kleeman SD, Yook E, Pauls RN. Uterosacral ligament suspension versus robotic sacrocolpopexy for treatment of apical pelvic organ prolapse. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2019;25(2):93\u20138. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000704.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"1","key":"6158_CR56","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"5","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000000006","volume":"123","author":"JT Anger","year":"2014","unstructured":"Anger JT, Mueller ER, Tarnay C, Smith B, Stroupe K, Rosenman A, et al. Robotic compared with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(1):5\u201312. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/AOG.0000000000000006.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"6158_CR57","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"116","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urology.2019.07.043","volume":"134","author":"E Illiano","year":"2019","unstructured":"Illiano E, Ditonno P, Giannitsas K, De Rienzo G, Bini V, Costantini E. Robot-assisted vs laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for high-stage pelvic organ prolapse: a prospective, randomized, single-center study. Urology. 2019;134:116\u201323. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.urology.2019.07.043.","journal-title":"Urology"},{"issue":"5","key":"6158_CR58","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"382","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000300","volume":"22","author":"K Kenton","year":"2016","unstructured":"Kenton K, Mueller ER, Tarney C, Bresee C, Anger JT. One-year outcomes after minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2016;22(5):382\u20134. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000300.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"5","key":"6158_CR59","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1005","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e318231537c","volume":"118","author":"MFR Paraiso","year":"2011","unstructured":"Paraiso MFR, Jelovsek JE, Frick A, Chen CCG, Barber MD. Laparoscopic compared with robotic sacrocolpopexy for vaginal prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(5):1005\u201313. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/AOG.0b013e318231537c.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"8","key":"6158_CR60","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2105","DOI":"10.3390\/biomedicines11082105","volume":"11","author":"A Martoccia","year":"2023","unstructured":"Martoccia A, Al Salhi Y, Fuschi A, Rera OA, Suraci PP, Scalzo S, et al. Robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy versus trans-vaginal multicompartment prolapse repair: impact on lower bowel tract function.\u00a0Biomedicines. 2023;11(8):2105. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/biomedicines11082105.","journal-title":"Biomedicines"},{"key":"6158_CR61","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"55","DOI":"10.1002\/jrsm.1411","volume":"12","author":"LA McGuinness","year":"2021","unstructured":"McGuinness LA, Higgins JPT. Risk-of-bias VISualization (robvis): an R package and shiny web app for visualizing risk-of-bias assessments. Res Synth Methods. 2021;12:55\u201361.","journal-title":"Res Synth Methods"},{"issue":"7","key":"6158_CR62","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"CD012376","DOI":"10.1002\/14651858.CD012376.pub2","volume":"7","author":"C Maher","year":"2023","unstructured":"Maher C, Yeung E, Haya N, Christmann-Schmid C, Mowat A, Chen Z, Baessler K. Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023;7(7):CD012376. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/14651858.CD012376.pub2.","journal-title":"Cochrane Database Syst Rev"},{"issue":"2","key":"6158_CR63","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"373","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urology.2003.09.033","volume":"63","author":"DS Di Marco","year":"2004","unstructured":"Di Marco DS, Chow GK, Gettman MT, Elliott DS. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. Urology. 2004;63(2):373\u20136. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.urology.2003.09.033.","journal-title":"Urology"},{"issue":"2","key":"6158_CR64","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"297","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-021-04741-x","volume":"33","author":"CL Chang","year":"2022","unstructured":"Chang CL, Chen CH, Chang SJ. Comparing the outcomes and effectiveness of robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33(2):297\u2013308. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-021-04741-x.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"11","key":"6158_CR65","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2921","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-022-05223-4","volume":"33","author":"Joint Writing Group of the International Urogynecological Association and the American Urogynecologic Society","year":"2022","unstructured":"Joint Writing Group of the International Urogynecological Association and the American Urogynecologic Society. AUGS-IUGA Joint clinical consensus statement on enhanced recovery after urogynecologic surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33(11):2921\u201340. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-022-05223-4.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"}],"container-title":["International Urogynecology Journal"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00192-025-06158-2.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s00192-025-06158-2\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00192-025-06158-2.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,9,6]],"date-time":"2025-09-06T19:25:43Z","timestamp":1757186743000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s00192-025-06158-2"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,12]]},"references-count":65,"journal-issue":{"issue":"7","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,7]]}},"alternative-id":["6158"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-025-06158-2","relation":{},"ISSN":["0937-3462","1433-3023"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0937-3462","type":"print"},{"value":"1433-3023","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,12]]},"assertion":[{"value":"4 June 2024","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"13 April 2025","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"12 June 2025","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"None.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Conflicts of Interest"}}]}}