Introduction of newer surgical prostheses and procedures in pelvic reconstruction: A challenge for pelvic surgeons

Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 19, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 461-463

  Ho, Mat H ^a   Bhatia, Narender N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL AND DENTAL MATERIALS;

EDITORIAL; HEALTH CARE POLICY; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE; PELVIS SURGERY; PLASTIC SURGERY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SURGEON; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; GYNECOLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; GYNECOLOGY; HUMANS; PELVIC FLOOR; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGICAL PROCEDURES; SURGICAL MESH; VAGINA;

EID: 34648851389     PISSN: 1040872X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e3282f09edd     Document Type: Editorial

References (13)

1. Culligan PJ, Blackwell L, Goldsmith LJ, et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing fascia lata and synthetic mesh for sacral colpopexy. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106:29-37.
2. Ho MH, Lin LL, Haessler AL, Bhatia NN. Tension-free transobturator tape procedure for stress urinary incontinence. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2006; 18:567-574.
3. Novara G, Ficarra V, Boscolo-Berto R, et al. Tension-free midurethral slings in the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of effectiveness. Eur Urol 2007; Epub ahead of print.
4. Committee on Practice Bulletins-Gynecology, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG practice bulletin no. 79: pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 109:461-473.
5. Gregory WT, Otto LN, Bergstrom JO, Clark AL. Surgical outcome of abdominal sacrocolpopexy with synthetic mesh versus abdominal sacrocolpopexy with cadaveric fascia lata. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2005; 16:369-374.
6. Silva WA, Karram MM. Scientific basis for use of grafts during vaginal reconstructive procedures. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2005; 17:519-529.
7. Baessler K, Maher CF. Mesh augmentation during pelvic-floor reconstructive surgery: risks and benefits. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2006; 18:560-566.
8. Trabuco EC, Klingele CJ, Gebhart JB. Xenograft use in reconstructive pelvic surgery: a review of the literature. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2007; 18:555-563.
9. De Angelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, et al. Is this clinical trial fully registered? A statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Haematologica 2006; 91:293-295.
10. Laine C, Horton R, De Angelis C, et al. Clinical trial registration: looking back and moving ahead. Med J Aust 2007; 186:612-613.
11. Mattox TF, Moore S, Stanford EJ, Mills BB. Posterior vaginal sling experience in elderly patients yields poor results. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006; 194:1462-1466.
12. Baessler K, Hewson AD, Tunn R, et al. Severe mesh complications following intravaginal slingplasty. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106:713-716.
13. Davila GW, Drutz H, Deprest J. Clinical implications of the biology of grafts: conclusions of the 2005 IUGA Grafts Roundtable. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2006; 17 (Suppl 1):S51-S55.