Literature DB >> 15746659

Controversies and uncertainties: abdominal versus vaginal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse.

Linda Brubaker1.   

Abstract

Reconstructive pelvic surgery is a common phenomenon in American women. The efficacy and durability of current procedures are often extrapolated from clinical case series and may be fraught with bias. Although the route of reconstructive pelvic surgery is debated with little evidence to support expert opinion, several recent clinical trials have provided a modest amount of data that can assist surgeons in counseling women who are facing prolapse repairs. An individual woman's tolerance for certain symptoms and risks can be matched with the scientifically based evidence for certain procedures. It is clear that the route of surgery must vary with individual surgeons and individual patients. The challenge is to test current surgical habits using modern clinical trials to obtain the necessary information to optimize each and every woman's restorative surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15746659     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.10.633

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  4 in total

1.  Sedation and local anaesthesia for vaginal pelvic floor repair of genital prolapse using mesh.

Authors:  Folke Flam
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2007-03-17

Review 2.  Evolution of biological and synthetic grafts in reconstructive pelvic surgery.

Authors:  Peter L Dwyer
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2006-06

3.  Computer modeling informs study design: vaginal estrogen to prevent mesh erosion after different routes of prolapse surgery.

Authors:  Alison C Weidner; Jennifer M Wu; Amie Kawasaki; Evan R Myers
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-07-17       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Effect of vaginal infiltration with ornipressin or saline on intraoperative blood loss during vaginal prolapse surgery: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Etienne W Henn; Thando Nondabula; Leonard Juul
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-08-21       Impact factor: 2.894

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.