Autonomic Plexuses of the Female Sexual Organs Travel Within Pubocervical and Rectovaginal [Endopelvic] Fascia: A Rationale for ‘Nerve‐Aware’ Vaginal Prolapse Repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The connective tissue support of female pelvic viscera-endopelvic fascia-has been studied in fetal and immunohistochemical models to demonstrate its relationship with the autonomic nerves of the female pelvis. Due to a paucity of literature examining the gross anatomical relationships between endopelvic fascia and autonomic nerves in adult female pelvises, it remains unknown whether defects in endopelvic fascia predisposing pelvic organ prolapse and/or manipulation of endopelvic fascia during prolapse repair may be the cause of prolapse-related pelvic pain and sexual dysfunction. Through the dissection of formalin-fixed hemipelvises (n = 10) the present study aimed to map the loci of the visceral branches of the inferior hypogastric plexus and associate them with endopelvic fascia of the female pelvis. In all specimens, two gross bundles of autonomic nerves were identified within pubocervical fascia traveling caudally to innervate the clitoral crura, vestibular bulbs, and anterior vaginal wall. Moreover, a distinct bundle was found traveling within the rectovaginal septum innervating the posterior vaginal wall. Immunohistochemical staining for S100 protein confirmed the presence of nerves and ganglia within pubocervical fascia that were localized near the vaginal arteries. Additionally, our dissections revealed that the visceral branches of the inferior hypogastric plexus can be stratified to correspond to different named components of endopelvic fascia. Clinically, our results provide a robust anatomical characterization that will inform the development of surgical approaches to reduce the risk of pelvic neuropathy during vaginal prolapse surgery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".