ReviewBioMed research international2015
Biomaterials for pelvic floor reconstructive surgery: how can we do better?
Review in BioMed research international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.
- Animal experimental research assessing urogynecologic surgical mesh implants: Outcome measures describing the host response, a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurourology and urodynamics · 2021Pooled it
- Gene expression in stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review.International urogynecology journal · 2020Pooled it
- Ascorbic acid 2-phosphate-releasing poly-l-lactide-co-epsilon-caprolactone membranes enhance tissue regeneration: firstRegenerative biomaterials · 2025Article
- Efficacy of the Sub-Urethral Transobturator KIM SystemJournal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- An in vitro pilot study investigating placenta-derived mesenchymal stem cell coating on polypropylene mesh materials.International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- Supramolecular Fibrous Hydrogel Augmentation of Uterosacral Ligament Suspension for Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse.Advanced healthcare materials · 2023Article
- Polypropylene Pelvic Mesh: What Went Wrong and What Will Be of the Future?Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Absorbable Electrospun Poly-4-hydroxybutyrate Scaffolds as a Potential Solution for Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery.ACS applied bio materials · 2022Article
- Evaluating tissue-engineered repair material for pelvic floor dysfunction: a comparison of in vivo response to meshes implanted in rats.International urogynecology journal · 2022Article
- The impact of bacterial contamination on the host response towards fully absorbable poly-4-hydroxybutyrate and nonabsorbable polypropylene pelvic floor implants.Materials today. Bio · 2022Article
- Tissue-engineered repair material for pelvic floor dysfunction.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- Development of a cellulose-based prosthetic mesh for pelvic organ prolapse treatment:Materials today. Bio · 2021Article
- In Vitro Bacterial Adhesion and Biofilm Formation on Fully Absorbable Poly-4-hydroxybutyrate and Nonabsorbable Polypropylene Pelvic Floor Implants.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2020Article
- Biologic Grafts for Use in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery: a Contemporary Review.Current urology reports · 2020Review
- A novel antibacterial biomaterial mesh coated by chitosan and tigecycline for pelvic floor repair and its biological performance.Regenerative biomaterials · 2020Article
- Emerging Nano/Micro-Structured Degradable Polymeric Meshes for Pelvic Floor Reconstruction.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Titanized polypropylene mesh in laparoscopic sacral colpopexy.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- Experimental study of a new original mesh developed for pelvic floor reconstructive surgery.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- Managing female pelvic floor disorders: a medical device review and appraisal.Interface focus · 2019Review
- In vivo biocompatibility and time-dependent changes in mechanical properties of woven collagen meshes: A comparison to xenograft and synthetic mid-urethral sling materials.Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) are major health issues that detrimentally impact the quality of life of millions of women worldwide. Surgical repair is an effective and durable treatment for both conditions. Over the past two decades there has been a trend to enforce or reinforce repairs with synthetic and biological materials. The determinants of surgical outcome are many, encompassing the physical and mechanical properties of the material used, and individual immune responses, as well surgical and constitutional factors. Of the current biomaterials in use none represents an ideal. Biomaterials that induce limited inflammatory response followed by constructive remodelling appear to have more long term success than biomaterials that induce chronic inflammation, fibrosis and encapsulation. In this review we draw upon published animal and human studies to characterize the changes biomaterials undergo after implantation and the typical host responses, placing these in the context of clinical outcomes.
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.