{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,3]],"date-time":"2026-09-03T14:12:19Z","timestamp":1788444739644,"version":"build-2803163510"},"reference-count":37,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,3]],"date-time":"2026-09-03T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1788393600000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,3]],"date-time":"2026-09-03T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1788393600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100002907","name":"Coloplast","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100002907","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]},{"name":"Boston Scientific"},{"name":"Neomedic"},{"DOI":"10.13039\/100016304","name":"Medtronic","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","id":[{"id":"10.13039\/100016304","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]},{"name":"Foundation for Female Health Awarenewss"},{"DOI":"10.13039\/100019340","name":"Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Wake Forest School of Medicine","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","id":[{"id":"10.13039\/100019340","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]},{"DOI":"10.13039\/100006108","name":"National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["UM1TR004929"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["UM1TR004929"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/100006108","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]},{"DOI":"10.13039\/100007154","name":"Wake Forest University","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","id":[{"id":"10.13039\/100007154","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"crossref"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Int Urogynecol J"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Introduction and Hypothesis<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Sacrocolpopexy (SCP) is regarded as the gold-standard apical suspension procedure for vaginal vault prolapse; however, systematic reviews informing this reputation have largely included post-hysterectomy populations. Comparative evidence for primary uterovaginal prolapse (U-POP) remains limited. We aimed to evaluate failure and retreatment rates after hysterectomy with minimally invasive SCP compared with vaginal hysterectomy and native tissue repair (TVH\u2009+\u2009NTR).<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO CRD420251171050) as part of the 2026 U-POP Global Consensus Conference. MEDLINE and Embase were searched through October 31, 2025. Eligible studies included randomized trials and comparative cohort studies (\u2265\u200930 participants) evaluating hysterectomy with minimally invasive SCP for primary U-POP, with or without a comparator group undergoing TVH\u2009+\u2009NTR. Outcomes included retreatment and failure. Pooled proportions of outcomes were estimated and between-group differences were evaluated using mixed-effects meta-regression. Study quality was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Of 5262 abstracts and 189 full texts screened, 24 studies met inclusion criteria: 6329 patients underwent hysterectomy with SCP and 681 underwent TVH\u2009+\u2009NTR. Compared with TVH\u2009+\u2009NTR, hysterectomy with SCP demonstrated significantly lower retreatment rates (1.59% vs 10.23%,\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009&lt;\u20090.0001), subjective failure (5.09% vs 17.55%,\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.002), objective failure (6.80% vs 18.16%,\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.002), and composite failure (9.23% vs 18.19%,\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      \u2009=\u20090.005). Certainty of evidence was moderate to low.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>For women undergoing surgery for U-POP, hysterectomy with minimally invasive SCP is associated with significantly lower failure and retreatment rates compared with TVH\u2009+\u2009NTR and thus may be preferred for patients at higher risk of recurrence.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-026-06863-6","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,3]],"date-time":"2026-09-03T13:14:46Z","timestamp":1788441286000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Hysterectomy with Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy Versus Native Tissue Repair for Primary Uterovaginal Prolapse: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"],"prefix":"10.1007","author":[{"given":"Joseph A.","family":"Huffman","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Sarah","family":"Ashmore","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Shihyun","family":"Kim","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Dheera","family":"Samdariya","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Pranadeep","family":"Reddy","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Mackenzie","family":"Wood","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Kaidi","family":"Kang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Jacqueline","family":"Zillioux","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Cara L.","family":"Grimes","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Ankita","family":"Gupta","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Amy","family":"Sisson","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0006-2237-6094","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Catherine A.","family":"Matthews","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,3]]},"reference":[{"issue":"3","key":"6863_CR1","volume":"3","author":"E Yeung","year":"2024","unstructured":"Yeung E, Baessler K, Christmann-Schmid C, Haya N, Chen Z, Wallace SA, et al. Transvaginal mesh or grafts or native tissue repair for vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024;3(3):CD012079.","journal-title":"Cochrane Database Syst Rev"},{"issue":"6","key":"6863_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1201","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000000286","volume":"123","author":"JM Wu","year":"2014","unstructured":"Wu JM, Matthews CA, Conover MM, Pate V, Jonsson FM. Lifetime risk of stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(6):1201\u20136.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"8","key":"6863_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"845","DOI":"10.1001\/jamasurg.2024.1206","volume":"159","author":"SA Menefee","year":"2024","unstructured":"Menefee SA, Richter HE, Myers D, Moalli P, Weidner AC, Harvie HS, et al. Apical suspension repair for vaginal vault prolapse: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg. 2024;159(8):845\u201355.","journal-title":"JAMA Surg"},{"issue":"2","key":"6863_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"355","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000003884","volume":"136","author":"CA Matthews","year":"2020","unstructured":"Matthews CA, Geller EJ, Henley BR, Kenton K, Myers EM, Dieter AA, et al. Permanent compared with absorbable suture for vaginal mesh fixation during total hysterectomy and sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;136(2):355\u201364.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"5","key":"6863_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1121","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-022-05445-6","volume":"34","author":"AS El Haraki","year":"2023","unstructured":"El Haraki AS, Shepherd JP, Parker-Autry C, Matthews CA. Financial analysis of minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy compared with native tissue vaginal repair with concomitant hysterectomy. Int Urogynecol J. 2023;34(5):1121\u20136.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"10","key":"6863_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1023","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2014.1719","volume":"311","author":"MD Barber","year":"2014","unstructured":"Barber MD, Brubaker L, Burgio KL, Richter HE, Nygaard I, Weidner AC, et al. Comparison of 2 transvaginal surgical approaches and perioperative behavioral therapy for apical vaginal prolapse: the OPTIMAL randomized trial. JAMA. 2014;311(10):1023\u201334.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"6863_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-026-06758-6","author":"A Gupta","year":"2026","unstructured":"Gupta A, Grimes CL, Badlani G, Bortolini MAT, Rosamilia A, Robinson D, et al. A global consensus conference on surgical management of primary uterovaginal prolapse and lower urinary tract dysfunction: combining evidence with expert opinion. Int Urogynecol J. 2026. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-026-06758-6.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"key":"6863_CR8","unstructured":"Wolff DT, Santis-Moya F, Koven A, Antosh DD, Rotem R, Schmeil I, Pizarro-Berdichevsky J, Deprest J, Kang K, Wood M, Sisson A, Goldman HB, Zillioux J. Prevalence and surgical risk factors for severe postoperative complications in the treatment of primary uterovaginal prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2026;Special Edition."},{"issue":"7454","key":"6863_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1490","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.328.7454.1490","volume":"328","author":"D Atkins","year":"2004","unstructured":"Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328(7454):1490.","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"issue":"8","key":"6863_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1131","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-015-2666-0","volume":"26","author":"C Rondini","year":"2015","unstructured":"Rondini C, Braun H, Alvarez J, Urzua MJ, Villegas R, Wenzel C, et al. High uterosacral vault suspension vs sacrocolpopexy for treating apical defects: a randomized controlled trial with twelve months follow-up. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(8):1131\u20138.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"3","key":"6863_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"435","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000004484","volume":"138","author":"LE Giugale","year":"2021","unstructured":"Giugale LE, Melnyk AI, Ruppert KM, Napoe GS, Lavelle ES, Bradley MS. Total vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension compared with supracervical hysterectomy with sacrocervicopexy for uterovaginal prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2021;138(3):435\u201342.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"2","key":"6863_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"210","DOI":"10.1089\/end.2014.0413","volume":"29","author":"KG No\u00e9","year":"2015","unstructured":"No\u00e9 KG, Schiermeier S, Alkatout I, Anapolski M. Laparoscopic pectopexy: a prospective, randomized, comparative clinical trial of standard laparoscopic sacral colpocervicopexy with the new laparoscopic pectopexy-postoperative results and intermediate-term follow-up in a pilot study. J Endourol. 2015;29(2):210\u20135.","journal-title":"J Endourol"},{"key":"6863_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3390\/jcm13051348","author":"E Malanowska-Jarema","year":"2024","unstructured":"Malanowska-Jarema E, Starczewski A, Melnyk M, Oliveira D, Balzarro M, Rubillota E. A randomized clinical trial comparing Dubuisson laparoscopic lateral suspension with laparoscopic sacropexy for pelvic organ prolapse: short-term results. J Clin Med. 2024. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/jcm13051348.","journal-title":"J Clin Med"},{"issue":"1","key":"6863_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"231","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-022-05267-6","volume":"34","author":"BS Isenlik","year":"2023","unstructured":"Isenlik BS, Aksoy O, Erol O, Mulayim B. Comparison of laparoscopic lateral suspension and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with concurrent total laparoscopic hysterectomy for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Int Urogynecol J. 2023;34(1):231\u20138.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"key":"6863_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Karadag B, Mulayim B, Karadag C, Akdas BA, Karatas S, Yuksel BA, et al. McCall culdoplasty vs. vaginally assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of advanced uterine prolapse: a randomized controlled study. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2023;62(2):325\u20139.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.tjog.2022.11.013"},{"issue":"4","key":"6863_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"545","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-018-3702-7","volume":"30","author":"E Bataller","year":"2019","unstructured":"Bataller E, Ros C, Angles S, Gallego M, Espuna-Pons M, Carmona F. Anatomical outcomes 1 year after pelvic organ prolapse surgery in patients with and without a uterus at a high risk of recurrence: a randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy\/cervicopexy and anterior vaginal mesh. Int Urogynecol J. 2019;30(4):545\u201355.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"10","key":"6863_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"814","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000001530","volume":"30","author":"LE Giugale","year":"2024","unstructured":"Giugale LE, Ruppert KM, Muluk SL, Glass Clark SM, Bradley MS, Wu JM, et al. Minimally invasive total versus supracervical hysterectomy with sacrocolpopexy. Urogynecology (Phila). 2024;30(10):814\u201320.","journal-title":"Urogynecology (Phila)"},{"issue":"2","key":"6863_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"151","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000001260","volume":"29","author":"SE Eckhardt","year":"2023","unstructured":"Eckhardt SE, Lee JS, Nguyen JN. Recurrence of anterior vaginal prolapse after robotic sacrocolpopexy: does cervical preservation affect outcome? Urogynecology. 2023;29(2):151\u20139.","journal-title":"Urogynecology"},{"issue":"4","key":"6863_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"300","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jmig.2022.12.011","volume":"30","author":"L Yan","year":"2023","unstructured":"Yan L, Lu S, Zhao C, Lei L, Liu L. Comparison of different laparoscopic sacropexy procedures for advanced uterine prolapse: a retrospective analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2023;30(4):300\u20137.","journal-title":"J Minim Invasive Gynecol"},{"issue":"4","key":"6863_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"585","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-014-2551-2","volume":"26","author":"EM Myers","year":"2015","unstructured":"Myers EM, Siff L, Osmundsen B, Geller E, Matthews CA. Differences in recurrent prolapse at 1 year after total vs supracervical hysterectomy and robotic sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(4):585\u20139.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"2","key":"6863_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"291","DOI":"10.1111\/luts.12369","volume":"13","author":"S Aydin","year":"2021","unstructured":"Aydin S, Ates S, Gokmen Karasu AF, Arioglu C. Short and middle-term outcomes of vaginally assisted laparoscopic sacropolpopexy. Low Urin Tract Symptoms. 2021;13(2):291\u20138.","journal-title":"Low Urin Tract Symptoms"},{"issue":"4","key":"6863_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"649","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-018-3790-4","volume":"30","author":"ERW Davidson","year":"2019","unstructured":"Davidson ERW, Thomas TN, Lampert EJ, Paraiso MFR, Ferrando CA. Route of hysterectomy during minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy does not affect postoperative outcomes. Int Urogynecol J. 2019;30(4):649\u201355.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"11","key":"6863_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3213","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-022-05093-w","volume":"33","author":"KL Woodburn","year":"2022","unstructured":"Woodburn KL, El Haraki AS, Sokol AI, Gutman RE, Matthews CA. Mesh exposure following vaginal versus laparoscopic hysterectomy at the time of sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33(11):3213\u201320.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"3","key":"6863_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"151","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000000222","volume":"22","author":"PA Nosti","year":"2016","unstructured":"Nosti PA, Carter CM, Sokol AI, Tefera E, Iglesia CB, Park AJ, et al. Transvaginal versus transabdominal placement of synthetic mesh at time of sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2016;22(3):151\u20135.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"2","key":"6863_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"85","DOI":"10.1097\/SPV.0000000000001087","volume":"28","author":"A Gupta","year":"2022","unstructured":"Gupta A, Ton JB, Maheshwari D, Schroeder MN, Small AN, Jia X, et al. Route of hysterectomy at the time of sacrocolpopexy: a multicenter retrospective cohort study. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2022;28(2):85\u20139.","journal-title":"Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg"},{"issue":"1","key":"6863_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"135","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-022-05263-w","volume":"34","author":"JY Kikuchi","year":"2023","unstructured":"Kikuchi JY, Yanek LR, Handa VL, Chen CCG, Jacobs S, Blomquist J, et al. Prolapse and mesh reoperations following sacrocolpopexy: comparing supracervical hysterectomy, total hysterectomy, and no hysterectomy. Int Urogynecol J. 2023;34(1):135\u201345.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"12","key":"6863_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2467","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-025-06253-4","volume":"36","author":"A Blondeau","year":"2025","unstructured":"Blondeau A, Chommeloux M, Haudebert C, Richard C, Dubois A, Penafiel J, et al. Robotic sacrocolpopexy with versus without supracervical hysterectomy. Int Urogynecol J. 2025;36(12):2467\u201372.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"1","key":"6863_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"93","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-015-2775-9","volume":"27","author":"K Pan","year":"2016","unstructured":"Pan K, Cao L, Ryan NA, Wang Y, Xu H. Laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(1):93\u2013101.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"9","key":"6863_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/jog.70068","volume":"51","author":"K Ota","year":"2025","unstructured":"Ota K, Takahashi T, Ota Y, Tsuji K, Tasaka K, Okamoto H, et al. Comparison of surgical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with concomitant total hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse: a retrospective cohort study. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2025;51(9):e70068.","journal-title":"J Obstet Gynaecol Res"},{"key":"6863_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Oh S, Shin EK, Hyun S, Jeon MJ. Comparison of treatment outcomes for native tissue repair and sacrocolpopexy as apical suspension procedures at the time of hysterectomy for uterine prolapse. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):3119.","DOI":"10.1038\/s41598-021-82732-0"},{"key":"6863_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.31083\/j.ceog5005110","author":"\u00d6 \u00dcnal","year":"2023","unstructured":"\u00dcnal \u00d6, Karadeniz O. Comparison of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and vaginal sacrospinous ligament fixation techniques applied concomitantly in patients undergoing vaginal or laparoscopic hysterectomy for uterovaginal pelvic prolapse. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2023. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.31083\/j.ceog5005110.","journal-title":"Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"1","key":"6863_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"271","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-022-05403-2","volume":"34","author":"JCY Chan","year":"2023","unstructured":"Chan JCY, Yu CH, Go WW. Clinical outcomes and complications of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with versus without concomitant hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse in Hong Kong Chinese patients after median follow-up of 7 years. Int Urogynecol J. 2023;34(1):271\u20138.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"issue":"7","key":"6863_CR33","volume":"7","author":"C Maher","year":"2023","unstructured":"Maher C, Yeung E, Haya N, Christmann-Schmid C, Mowat A, Chen Z, et al. Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023;7(7):CD012376.","journal-title":"Cochrane Database Syst Rev"},{"key":"6863_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2026.04.012","author":"K Weston","year":"2026","unstructured":"Weston K, Kenne KA, Bradley CS, Wendt L, Kowalski JT. Prolapse phenotypes and 12-month postoperative prolapse recurrence after apical native tissue surgery: a combined analysis using multicenter randomized trials and registry data. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2026. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ajog.2026.04.012.","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"6863_CR35","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-026-06641-4","author":"JOL DeLancey","year":"2026","unstructured":"DeLancey JOL, Ashton-Miller JA, LaCross J, Schmidt P, Masteling M, Pipitone F, et al. Urogenital hiatus closure system: a framework for understanding how muscle, motor control, and fascial connections interact in normal and failed closure. Int Urogynecol J. 2026. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-026-06641-4.","journal-title":"Int Urogynecol J"},{"key":"6863_CR36","unstructured":"Ashmore S, Huffman JA, Reddy P, Samdariya D, Wood M, Kang K, Grimes CL, Gupta A, Sisson A, Matthews CA. Route of hysterectomy during sacrocolpopexy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2026;IUJ Special Edition."},{"issue":"1","key":"6863_CR37","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"44","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000000570","volume":"125","author":"NY Siddiqui","year":"2015","unstructured":"Siddiqui NY, Grimes CL, Casiano ER, Abed HT, Jeppson PC, Olivera CK, et al. Mesh sacrocolpopexy compared with native tissue vaginal repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(1):44\u201355.","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"}],"container-title":["International Urogynecology Journal"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00192-026-06863-6.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s00192-026-06863-6","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00192-026-06863-6.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,3]],"date-time":"2026-09-03T13:14:49Z","timestamp":1788441289000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s00192-026-06863-6"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,3]]},"references-count":37,"alternative-id":["6863"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00192-026-06863-6","relation":{},"ISSN":["0937-3462","1433-3023"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0937-3462","type":"print"},{"value":"1433-3023","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,3]]},"assertion":[{"value":"3 June 2026","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"24 July 2026","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"3 September 2026","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"J Huffman, S Ashmore, S Kim, P Reddy, D Samdariya, M Wood, K Kang: None; Jacqueline Zillioux, MD: Grant funding from Laborie and Silq Technologies; C Grimes: Consultant Provepharm (past 24\u00a0months, completed); A Gupta, A Sisson: None. C Matthews: Grant support from Coloplast and Boston Scientific; Consultant to Coloplast; Speaker fees from Neomedic; Expert Witness for Johnson & Johnson.","order":1,"name":"Ethics","label":"Conflicts of Interest","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}}]}}