ReviewInternational urogynecology journal2017
Transvaginal mesh: a historical review and update of the current state of affairs in the United States.
Review in International urogynecology journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toward a Future Where Diabetes No Longer Limits Mesh Surgery.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Prolapse recurrence, methods of reoperation, and long-term mesh complications-A nationwide follow-up study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Improving long-term postoperative pain monitoring and follow-up for women undergoing incontinence mesh surgery: a quality improvement initiative.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Trends in Urogynecology-Transvaginal Mesh Surgery in Germany.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- An Unusual Delayed Complication of Urogynecologic Surgical Mesh: Perirectal Abscess 10 Years After Initial Placement Treated by Endoscopic Removal.ACG case reports journal · 2021Article
- Quantitative Morphometry of Elastic Fibers in Pelvic Organ Prolapse.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2021Article
- Making surgery safer through adequate communication with the stakeholders: vaginal slings.World journal of urology · 2020Review
- The importance of a full thickness vaginal wall dissection. Comment on "Transvaginal mesh: a historical review and update of the current state of affairs in the United States".International urogynecology journal · 2017Article
- Quality of Life, Sexuality, Anatomical Results and Side-effects of Implantation of an Alloplastic Mesh for Cystocele Correction at Follow-up after 36 Months.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2017Article
- Role of concurrent vaginal hysterectomy in the outcomes of mesh-based vaginal pelvic organ prolapse surgery.International urogynecology journal · 2017Article
- The Pros and Cons of Hystero-preservation on Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyReview
- Outcomes of laparoscopic hysteropexy and supracervical hysterectomy plus cervicopexy: A retrospective study.Tzu chi medical journalArticle
- Single-Incision Mini-Sling for the Treatment of Female Stress Urinary Incontinence: Is it Actually Inferior to Transobturator Vaginal Tape and Tension-Free Vaginal Tape?Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTransvaginal mesh usage has been at the forefront of popular media and academic debate for the past 10 years. Several US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) communications, society statements, and research articles have been written in an attempt to define and articulate the classification system, safety data, and efficacy of this approach to transvaginal surgery. In this review, we explore the history of transvaginal mesh surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP), review FDA and society statements, and research current practice in the United States.
methodsWe searched the English language literature using PubMed for articles related to safety and monitoring of transvaginal mesh and reviewed all FDA publication and notices and gynecology and urogynecology society statements on its use in the United States. We then reviewed 22 articles and grouped them into several sections.
resultsMesh used to augment transvaginal repair of POP was introduced in the United States in 2005 without clinical safety and efficacy data. In the subsequent years of use, both major and minor complications were increasingly reported, leading to several FDA notifications and warnings. The type of mesh used, reporting and classifications systems, and provider usage has varied widely over time.
conclusionWe present a historical review of transvaginal mesh use for pelvic organ prolapse in the United States from 2005 to 2016. There continues to be heated debate among practitioners about balancing the efficacy of mesh use to decrease recurrent prolapse and complications. Research into safety and efficacy, along with tighter FDA regulations, is ongoing.
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.