Evidence-based Medicine for Polypropylene Mesh Use Compared With Native Tissue Vaginal Prolapse Repair - 06/08/12
Reprint requests: Donald R. Ostergard, M.D., F.A.C.O.G., Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health, Division of Urogynecology, 550 S. Jackson Street, Second Floor, Louisville, KY 40202Résumé |
A review of the current medical literature for the use of polypropylene (PP) mesh for vaginally performed prolapse repair, including only those studies reporting prospective, randomized, controlled trials compared with native tissue repairs was undertaken. Five full manuscript publications and 4 studies still in abstract form were all consistent with PP mesh producing better anatomical results for cystocele repair, but when functional results in terms of the patient's quality of life are considered, no significant difference is found between PP mesh and native tissue repairs. PP mesh use results in better anatomical results in the short term but at a cost of repeated surgeries because of erosions and other complications. Patients do not recognize any added benefit from the use of these prostheses in their daily lives.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.
Vol 79 - N° 1
P. 12-14 - janvier 2012 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Prostatic Urethral Lift: Two-year Results After Treatment for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Secondary to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
- Peter T. Chin, Damien M. Bolton, Greg Jack, Prem Rashid, Jeffrey Thavaseelan, R. James Yu, Claus G. Roehrborn, Henry H. Woo
- Editorial Comment
- Gopal H. Badlani
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?