Literature DB >> 22113260

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

Cara L Grimes1, Jasmine Tan-Kim, Emily L Whitcomb, Emily S Lukacz, Shawn A Menefee.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: We aimed to compare the outcomes of native tissue vs. biological graft-augmented repair in the posterior compartment. We hypothesized that the addition of graft would result in superior anatomic and functional outcomes.
METHODS: A retrospective review of posterior repairs between 2001 and 2008 was performed to compare the anatomic and functional outcomes between native tissue and graft-augmented techniques. Mann-Whitney and chi-square tests were used. Power calculation determined that 32 subjects were needed in each group.
RESULTS: One hundred twenty-four native tissue and 69 graft-augmented repairs were performed with a median follow-up of 35.8 months (range, 6 to 157 months). Anatomic success was similar for native tissue vs. graft (Bp < -1, 86% vs. 80% and Bp ≤ 0, 97% vs. 97%; all p > 0.05). Postoperative splinting and incomplete evacuation was greater in the graft group (splinting, 85% vs. 68%; p = 0.04 and incomplete evacuation, 85% vs. 64%; p = 0.03).
CONCLUSION: Long-term success of posterior repair is high. Graft augmentation does not appear to improve anatomic or functional outcomes.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22113260     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-011-1607-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urogynecol J        ISSN: 0937-3462            Impact factor:   2.894


  30 in total

1.  Encapsulation of a porcine dermis pubovaginal sling.

Authors:  Emily Cole; Alex Gomelsky; Roger R Dmochowski
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Rectocele repair: a randomized trial of three surgical techniques including graft augmentation.

Authors:  Marie Fidela R Paraiso; Matthew D Barber; Tristi W Muir; Mark D Walters
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 3.  Xenograft use in reconstructive pelvic surgery: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Emanuel C Trabuco; Christopher J Klingele; John B Gebhart
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2007-01-17

4.  Defecography in normal volunteers: results and implications.

Authors:  P J Shorvon; S McHugh; N E Diamant; S Somers; G W Stevenson
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 23.059

5.  Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence.

Authors:  A L Olsen; V J Smith; J O Bergstrom; J C Colling; A L Clark
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  Dermal graft-augmented rectocele repair.

Authors:  N Kohli; J R Miklos
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2003-02-13

7.  Surgical repair of posterior compartment prolapse: preliminary results of a novel transvaginal procedure using a four-armed polypropylene mesh with infracoccygeal and pararectal suspension.

Authors:  Boris Grabriel; Juliane Farthmann; Bernhard Brintrup; Christian Fünfgeld; Peter Jezek; Alfons Kraus; Florian Lenz; Eberhard Kumbier; Achim Niesel; Elmar Stickeler; Dirk Watermann
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 3.636

8.  An anatomic and functional assessment of the discrete defect rectocele repair.

Authors:  G W Cundiff; A C Weidner; A G Visco; W A Addison; R C Bump
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  Outcome of site-specific fascia repair for rectocele.

Authors:  Chrysanthi Sardeli; Susanne M Axelsen; Daniel Kjaer; Karl M Bek
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 3.636

Review 10.  Graft use in transvaginal pelvic organ prolapse repair: a systematic review.

Authors:  Vivian W Sung; 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
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 7.661

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Prolapse Repair Using Non-synthetic Material: What is the Current Standard?

Authors:  Ricardo Palmerola; Nirit Rosenblum
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2019-10-14       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  Joint report on terminology for surgical procedures to treat pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors: 
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Surgical interventions for posterior compartment prolapse and obstructed defecation symptoms: a systematic review with clinical practice recommendations.

Authors:  Cara L Grimes; Megan O Schimpf; Cecilia K Wieslander; Ambereen Sleemi; Paula Doyle; You Maria Wu; Ruchira Singh; Ethan M Balk; David D Rahn
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-06-29       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 4.  Where to for pelvic organ prolapse treatment after the FDA pronouncements? A systematic review of the recent literature.

Authors:  J M van Geelen; P L Dwyer
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Transvaginal rectocele repair with human dermal allograft interposition and bilateral sacrospinous fixation with a minimum eight-year follow-up.

Authors:  Serge P Marinkovic; Scott Hughes; Donghua Xie; Lisa M Gillen; Christina M Marinkovic
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2016-03-25       Impact factor: 2.264

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.