{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,18]],"date-time":"2026-08-18T15:53:51Z","timestamp":1787068431651,"version":"build-2736575974"},"reference-count":30,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"8","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,17]],"date-time":"2026-03-17T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1773705600000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,17]],"date-time":"2026-03-17T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1773705600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100007176","name":"Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100007176","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"crossref"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Int Urogynecol J"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,8]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Introduction and Hypothesis<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Surgical management for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is anything but standardized. We aimed to compare operating times, hospital stay, complications, and reinterventions following robot-assisted surgery (RAS), laparoscopy (LPS), or transvaginal surgery (TVS) for POP repair<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>We retrospectively analyzed records from our hospital (January 2017\u2013December 2023), including women receiving RAS or LPS (lateral suspension\/sacrocolpopexy), or TVS (hysterectomy with POP repair). Cysto\/rectopexies without hysterectomy were excluded. Surgical technique was determined from operative descriptions. Outcomes included: 1) operating time; 2) hospital stay; 3) complications; 4) reinterventions. Surgical route was the exposure variable. Adjusted linear, Poisson, logistic, and Cox regressions were used. A sub-analysis on lateral suspension and sacrocolpopexy was performed.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Of 583 women, 14.4% had LPS, 48.5% RAS, and 37.1% TVS. Adjusted models showed longer operating times for LPS vs RAS (+\u200921.6\u00a0min, 95% CI\u2009+\u20098.7 to\u2009+\u200934.4) and shorter for TVS (-62.7\u00a0min, 95% CI -72.9 to -52.5). Hospitalization length was similar for LPS vs RAS, while longer for TVS (+\u20090.5\u00a0days, 95% CI\u2009+\u20090.3 to\u2009+\u20090.7). Reinterventions and complications did not differ between groups. In sub-analysis, no differences in operating times and length of stay for lateral suspension were observed. For sacrocolpopexy, LPS was longer than RAS (+\u200954.1\u00a0min, 95% CI\u2009+\u200930.3 to\u2009+\u200977.8); no difference in hospital stay emerged.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>RAS and LPS had similar safety and reintervention profiles. LPS was linked to longer operating times than RAS, and similar hospital stay. TVS had shorter operating times but required longer hospitalization. Sub-analyses suggested comparable performance for lateral suspension, while LPS sacrocolpopexy was more time-consuming than RAS.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-026-06571-1","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,17]],"date-time":"2026-03-17T12:29:44Z","timestamp":1773750584000},"page":"2497-2505","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Robot-assisted, Laparoscopic and Transvaginal Surgery for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: a Comparative Retrospective Single-Center Study"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"37","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-5309-2813","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Amerigo","family":"Ferrari","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Elena","family":"Pisacreta","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Marta","family":"Caretto","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Giulia","family":"Misasi","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Tiziana","family":"Fidecicchi","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Maria Magdalena","family":"Montt-Guevara","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Eleonora","family":"Russo","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Andrea","family":"Giannini","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Paolo","family":"Mannella","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Tommaso","family":"Simoncini","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,17]]},"reference":[{"key":"6571_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1027","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(07)60462-0","volume":"369","author":"JE Jelovsek","year":"2007","unstructured":"Jelovsek JE, Maher C, Barber MD. Pelvic organ prolapse. Lancet. 2007;369:1027\u201338. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/S0140-6736(07)60462-0.","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"key":"6571_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2011","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-021-04875-y","volume":"32","author":"SA Collins","year":"2021","unstructured":"Collins SA, O\u2019Shea M, Dykes N, Ramm O, Edenfield A, Shek KL, et al. International urogynecological consultation: clinical definition of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2021;32:2011\u20139. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-021-04875-y.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"key":"6571_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"118","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ogrm.2012.02.003","volume":"22","author":"S Hagen","year":"2012","unstructured":"Hagen S, Thakar R. Conservative management of pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynaecol Reprod Med. 2012;22:118\u201322. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ogrm.2012.02.003.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynaecol Reprod Med"},{"key":"6571_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2022-068145","volume":"13","author":"A Ferrari","year":"2023","unstructured":"Ferrari A, Giannini A, Seghieri C, Simoncini T, Vainieri M. Regional practice variation in pelvic organ prolapse surgery in Tuscany, Italy: a retrospective cohort study on administrative health data. BMJ Open. 2023;13:1\u201311. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2022-068145.","journal-title":"BMJ Open"},{"key":"6571_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1128","DOI":"10.1016\/j.eururo.2013.12.064","volume":"65","author":"RK Lee","year":"2014","unstructured":"Lee RK, Mottrie A, Payne CK, Waltregny D. A review of the current status of laparoscopic and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. Eur Urol. 2014;65:1128\u201337. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.eururo.2013.12.064.","journal-title":"Eur Urol"},{"key":"6571_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"109","DOI":"10.1016\/j.maturitas.2015.06.032","volume":"82","author":"P Mannella","year":"2015","unstructured":"Mannella P, Giannini A, Russo E, Naldini G, Simoncini T. Personalizing pelvic floor reconstructive surgery in aging women. Maturitas. 2015;82:109\u201315. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.maturitas.2015.06.032.","journal-title":"Maturitas"},{"key":"6571_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"60","DOI":"10.1080\/13697137.2018.1543266","volume":"22","author":"A Giannini","year":"2019","unstructured":"Giannini A, Caretto M, Russo E, Mannella P, Simoncini T. Advances in surgical strategies for prolapse. Climacteric. 2019;22:60\u20134. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/13697137.2018.1543266.","journal-title":"Climacteric"},{"key":"6571_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"284","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijgo.2015.08.008","volume":"132","author":"K Pan","year":"2016","unstructured":"Pan K, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Wang Y, Xu H. A systematic review and meta-analysis of conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016;132:284\u201391. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ijgo.2015.08.008.","journal-title":"Int J Gynaecol Obstet"},{"key":"6571_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Lawrie TA, Liu H, Lu DH, Dowswell T, Song H, Wang L, et al. Robot-assisted surgery in gynaecology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;2019. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/14651858.CD011422.pub2.","DOI":"10.1002\/14651858.CD011422.pub2"},{"key":"6571_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Schmid C. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;2013. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/14651858.CD004014.pub5.","DOI":"10.1002\/14651858.CD004014.pub5"},{"key":"6571_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"4344","DOI":"10.1007\/s00464-024-10917-5","volume":"38","author":"T Simoncini","year":"2024","unstructured":"Simoncini T, Panattoni A, Cadenbach-Blome T, Caiazzo N, Garc\u00eda MC, Caretto M, et al. Role of lateral suspension for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: a Delphi survey of expert panel. Surg Endosc. 2024;38:4344\u201352. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00464-024-10917-5.","journal-title":"Surg Endosc"},{"key":"6571_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2024-084034","volume":"14","author":"A Ferrari","year":"2024","unstructured":"Ferrari A, Bell\u00e8 N, Giannini A, Simoncini T, Vainieri M. Determinants of women\u2019s preferences for surgical versus conservative management for pelvic organ prolapse: a survey-based study from Italy. BMJ Open. 2024;14:e084034. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2024-084034.","journal-title":"BMJ Open"},{"key":"6571_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"221","DOI":"10.4103\/GMIT.GMIT_127_20","volume":"10","author":"Y Kotani","year":"2021","unstructured":"Kotani Y, Murakamsi K, Kai S, Yahata T, Kanto A, Matsumura N. Comparison of surgical results and postoperative recurrence rates by laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with other surgical procedures for managing pelvic organ prolapse. Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther. 2021;10:221\u20135. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4103\/GMIT.GMIT_127_20.","journal-title":"Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther"},{"key":"6571_CR14","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;118:1005\u201313. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/AOG.0b013e318231537c.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"6571_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"447","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmig.2024.12.006","volume":"32","author":"Y Zhang","year":"2025","unstructured":"Zhang Y, Jiang X, Mao M, Bai J, Tian Y, Sun W, et al. No difference in prolapse recurrence rates between laparoscopic and robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: a long-term comparison. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2025;32:447\u201353. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jmig.2024.12.006.","journal-title":"J Minim Invasive Gynecol"},{"key":"6571_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","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\u20139. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11701-023-01799-1.","journal-title":"J Robot Surg"},{"key":"6571_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"200","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmig.2023.11.016","volume":"31","author":"W Nilsson","year":"2024","unstructured":"Nilsson W, Schmidt M, Turner L, Shepherd J. Comparing postoperative pain with laparoscopic versus robotic sacrocolpopexy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2024;31:200\u20134. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jmig.2023.11.016.","journal-title":"J Minim Invasive Gynecol"},{"key":"6571_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"5647","DOI":"10.1007\/s00464-016-4924-8","volume":"30","author":"T Simoncini","year":"2016","unstructured":"Simoncini T, Russo E, Mannella P, Giannini A. Robotic-assisted apical lateral suspension for advanced pelvic organ prolapse: surgical technique and perioperative outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:5647\u201355. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00464-016-4924-8.","journal-title":"Surg Endosc"},{"key":"6571_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Giannini A, Russo E, Misasi G, Montt-Guevara MM, Mannella P, Simoncini T. Anatomical and functional outcomes of robotic abdominal lateral suspension for high-stage anterior-apical prolapse: a case series of 93 patients. Gynecol Pelvic Med. 2021;4:3\u20133. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.21037\/gpm-20-30.","DOI":"10.21037\/gpm-20-30"},{"key":"6571_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"120","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2024.03.042","volume":"297","author":"O Do\u011fan","year":"2024","unstructured":"Do\u011fan O, Yassa M, Eren E, Birol \u0130lter P, Tu\u011f N. A randomized, prospective, controlled study comparing uterine preserving laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh versus laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy in the treatment of uterine prolapse. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2024;297:120\u20135. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2024.03.042.","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol"},{"key":"6571_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"129","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2018.01.018","volume":"219","author":"KV Meriwether","year":"2018","unstructured":"Meriwether KV, Antosh DD, Olivera CK, Kim-Fine S, Balk EM, Murphy M, et al. Uterine preservation vs hysterectomy in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis and clinical practice guidelines. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;219:129-146.e2. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ajog.2018.01.018.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"6571_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"33","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000036","volume":"20","author":"PA Nosti","year":"2014","unstructured":"Nosti PA, Andy UU, Kane S, White DE, Harvie HS, Lowenstein L, et al. Outcomes of abdominal and minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: a retrospective cohort study. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2014;20:33\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000036.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"key":"6571_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Billone V, Gullo G, Perino G, Catania E, Cucinella G, Ganduscio S, et al. Robotic versus mini-laparoscopic colposacropexy to treat pelvic organ prolapse: a retrospective observational cohort study and a medicolegal perspective. J Clin Med. 2024;13. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/jcm13164802.","DOI":"10.3390\/jcm13164802"},{"key":"6571_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","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. Giornale Di Chirurgia. 2016;37:113\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.11138\/gchir\/2016.37.3.113.","DOI":"10.11138\/gchir\/2016.37.3.113"},{"key":"6571_CR25","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;123:5\u201312. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/AOG.0000000000000006.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"6571_CR26","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"},{"key":"6571_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Yang J, He Y, Zhang X, Wang Z, Zuo X, Gao L, et al. Robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Transl Med. 2021;9:449\u2013449. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.21037\/atm-20-4347.","DOI":"10.21037\/atm-20-4347"},{"key":"6571_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1037","DOI":"10.1007\/s11701-021-01329-x","volume":"16","author":"CL Chang","year":"2022","unstructured":"Chang CL, Chen CH, Yang SSD, Chang SJ. An updated systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing open, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy for managing pelvic organ prolapse. J Robot Surg. 2022;16:1037\u201345. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11701-021-01329-x.","journal-title":"J Robot Surg"},{"key":"6571_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"D\u00e4llenbach P. Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension (LLS) for the treatment of apical prolapse: a new gold standard? Front Surg. 2022;9. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fsurg.2022.898392.","DOI":"10.3389\/fsurg.2022.898392"},{"key":"6571_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"287","DOI":"10.1007\/s11701-021-01234-3","volume":"16","author":"P D\u00e4llenbach","year":"2022","unstructured":"D\u00e4llenbach P, Alec M, Boulvain M, Shabanov S. Outcomes of robotically assisted laparoscopic lateral suspension (RALLS) with mesh for anterior and apical prolapse. J Robot Surg. 2022;16:287\u201394. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11701-021-01234-3.","journal-title":"J Robot Surg"}],"container-title":["International Urogynecology Journal"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00192-026-06571-1.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s00192-026-06571-1","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00192-026-06571-1.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,18]],"date-time":"2026-08-18T15:08:22Z","timestamp":1787065702000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s00192-026-06571-1"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,17]]},"references-count":30,"journal-issue":{"issue":"8","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,8]]}},"alternative-id":["6571"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-026-06571-1","relation":{},"ISSN":["0937-3462","1433-3023"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0937-3462","type":"print"},{"value":"1433-3023","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,17]]},"assertion":[{"value":"18 December 2025","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"8 February 2026","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"17 March 2026","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"The study was carried out in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the Italian law on privacy 101\/2018, which is aligned with the European GDPR 2016\/679. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Pisa Teaching Hospital (Protocol approval: 808\/2015).","order":1,"name":"Ethics","label":"Ethical Considerations","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"None.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","label":"Conflicts of interest","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}}]}}