Pelvic Organ Prolapse

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

A smaller postoperative genital hiatus measurement on POP-Q exam was associated with dyspareunia at 12 months (location shift −0.5, 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0). Bothersome vaginal bulge (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2

Effect: decline; location shift −0.5; CI: 95% CI −0.5 – 0.0

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868

There was no significant difference in adverse event rates or severity between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy groups based on an indexed severity score (p=0.868), with 6 AE in the robotic arm

Effect: null; indexed AE severity p = 0.868