Literature DB >> 18978116

Graft use in transvaginal pelvic organ prolapse repair: a systematic review.

Vivian W Sung1, Rebecca G Rogers, Joseph I Schaffer, Ethan M Balk, Katrin Uhlig, Joseph Lau, Husam Abed, Thomas L Wheeler, Michelle Y Morrill, Jeffrey L Clemons, David D Rahn, James C Lukban, Lior Lowenstein, Kimberly Kenton, Stephen B Young.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the anatomic and symptomatic efficacy of graft use in transvaginal prolapse repair and to estimate the rates and describe the spectrum of adverse events associated with graft use. DATA SOURCES: Eligible studies, published between 1950 and November 27, 2007, were retrieved through Medline and bibliography searches. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: To assess anatomic and symptomatic efficacy of graft use, we used transvaginal prolapse repair studies that compared graft use with either native tissue repair or repair with a different graft. To estimate rates of adverse events from graft use, all comparative studies and case series with at least 30 participants were included. For spectrum of adverse events, all study designs were included. TABULATION, INTEGRATION AND
RESULTS: Eligible studies were extracted onto standardized forms by one reviewer and confirmed by a second reviewer. Comparative studies were classified by vaginal compartment (anterior, posterior, apical, or multiple), graft type (biologic, synthetic-absorbable, synthetic nonabsorbable) and outcome (anatomic, symptomatic). We found 16 comparative studies, including six randomized trials, 37 noncomparative studies with at least 30 women, 11 case series with fewer than 30 women, and 10 case reports of adverse events. One randomized trial and one prospective comparative study evaluating synthetic, nonabsorbable graft use in the anterior compartment reported favorable anatomic and symptomatic outcomes with graft use. Data regarding graft use for posterior and apical compartments or for biologic or synthetic absorbable graft use in the anterior compartment were insufficient to determine efficacy. Rates and spectrum of adverse events associated with graft use included bleeding (0-3%), visceral injury (1-4%), urinary infection (0-19%), graft erosion (0-30%), and fistula (1%). There were insufficient data regarding dyspareunia, sexual, voiding, or defecatory dysfunction.
CONCLUSION: Overall, the existing evidence is limited to guide decisions regarding whether to use graft materials in transvaginal prolapse surgery. Adequately powered randomized trials evaluating anatomic and symptomatic efficacy as well as adverse events are needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18978116     DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181898ba9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  38 in total

Review 1.  Vaginal estrogen use in postmenopausal women with pelvic floor disorders: systematic review and practice guidelines.

Authors:  David D Rahn; Renée M Ward; Tatiana V Sanses; Cassandra Carberry; Mamta M Mamik; Kate V Meriwether; Cedric K Olivera; Husam Abed; Ethan M Balk; Miles Murphy
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2014-11-13       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 2.  A systematic review comparing hysterectomy with less-invasive treatments for abnormal uterine bleeding.

Authors:  Kristen A Matteson; Husam Abed; Thomas L Wheeler; Vivian W Sung; David D Rahn; Joseph I Schaffer; Ethan M Balk
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 4.137

3.  Long-term outcomes after native tissue vs. biological graft-augmented repair in the posterior compartment.

Authors:  Cara L Grimes; Jasmine Tan-Kim; Emily L Whitcomb; Emily S Lukacz; Shawn A Menefee
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-11-24       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Factors associated with exposure of transvaginally placed polypropylene mesh for pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Karen P Gold; Renee M Ward; Carl W Zimmerman; Daniel H Biller; Shawn McGuinn; James C Slaughter; Roger R Dmochowski
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-03-24       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomized controlled trial of SIS graft versus traditional colporrhaphy.

Authors:  Paulo Cezar Feldner; Rodrigo Aquino Castro; Luiz Antonio Cipolotti; Carlos Antonio Delroy; Marair Gracio Ferreira Sartori; Manoel João Batista Castello Girão
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2010-04-29       Impact factor: 2.894

6.  Short-term outcomes of vaginal mesh placement among female Medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Jennifer T Anger; Aqsa A Khan; Karyn S Eilber; Erin Chong; Stephanie Histed; Ning Wu; Chris L Pashos; J Quentin Clemens
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 2.649

7.  Diagnosis and Therapy of Female Pelvic Organ Prolapse. Guideline of the DGGG, SGGG and OEGGG (S2e-Level, AWMF Registry Number 015/006, April 2016).

Authors:  K Baeßler; T Aigmüller; S Albrich; C Anthuber; D Finas; T Fink; C Fünfgeld; B Gabriel; U Henscher; F H Hetzer; M Hübner; B Junginger; K Jundt; S Kropshofer; A Kuhn; L Logé; G Nauman; U Peschers; T Pfiffer; O Schwandner; A Strauss; R Tunn; V Viereck
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 2.915

8.  Biologic grafts for cystocele repair: does concomitant midline fascial plication improve surgical outcomes?

Authors:  Deborah R Karp; Thais V Peterson; Ayman Mahdy; Gamal Ghoniem; Vivian C Aguilar; G Willy Davila
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-04-12       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 9.  Tissue engineering as a potential alternative or adjunct to surgical reconstruction in treating pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  M Boennelycke; S Gras; G Lose
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-09-01       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 10.  Are recurrence rates for "traditional" transvaginal prolapse repairs really that high? What does the evidence show?

Authors:  Alex Gomelsky; Randy Vince
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.092

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.