ArticleYonsei medical journal2007
Use of grafts in pelvic reconstructive surgery.
Article in Yonsei medical journal, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Polypropylene Pelvic Mesh: What Went Wrong and What Will Be of the Future?Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Polymorphism of a COLIA1 gene Sp1 binding site in Korean women with pelvic organ prolapse.Yonsei medical journal · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There has been growing interest in the use of grafts in pelvic reconstructive surgery. This article will address available graft materials and assess their clinical efficacy and safety. We conducted a Pubmed MEDLINE literature search for full-length English text studies with follow-up periods of at least one year. There are many reports on synthetic and biological graft materials; the majority are not well-designed, have short-term follow-up, small sample sizes, and poor outcome assessment. The use of non-absorbable synthetic grafts may offer excellent anatomical cure rates. However, it is associated with a high incidence of graft-related complications, including healing abnormalities and adverse bladder, bowel, and sexual function effects. These complications can be decreased with absorbable synthetic meshes, but efficacy is lower compared to non-absorbable ones. There is insufficient evidence in favor of biological grafts. In conclusion, based on current knowledge, routine application of grafts in pelvic reconstruction is not recommended. It is preferred that graft utilization be individualized, with close monitoring for complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.