ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2017
Solvent-dehydrated dermal allograft (AXIS™) augmented cystocele repair: longitudinal results.
Article 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Augmentation of Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair With Cannulated Dermal Allograft Implant.Arthroscopy techniques · 2022Article
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
introduction and hypothesisSurgical repair options for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) include native tissue, allograft, xenograft, and synthetic grafts. Solvent-dehydrated dermal allograft (SDDG) has an improved safety profile. We evaluated the long-term safety and efficacy of SDDG use for cystocele repair.
methodsA total of 184 patients completed a minimum follow-up of 12 months. Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ), Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI), and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) were used pre and post operatively. Recurrent cystocele grade ≥ II and/or repeat cystocele repair were considered objective failure.
resultsPreoperatively, 17 patients (10%) had grade IV cystocele, 87 (47%) grade III, 70 (38%) grade II, and 10 (5%) grade I. All patients underwent SDDG cystocele repair with/without vaginal sling and/or POP repair and/or hysterectomy. Mean hospital stay was 0.58 days (range 0-4), mean estimated blood loss (EBL) was 111 mL, and mean length of Foley catheterization was 1.85 days (range 0-28). Postoperatively, 113 patients (64%) had no recurrent cystocele, 34 (19%) had grade I, 19 (11%) grade II, and 10 (6%) grade III cystocele. None had grade IV cystocele. Nineteen patients (10.3%) underwent repeat cystocele repair. Thirty-eight patients (21.6%) had postoperative recurrence (recurrent cystocele grade ≥ II and/or repeat cystocele repair). Dermal allograft related adverse events included 1 (0.5%) allograft vaginal exposure, dyspareunia 1 (0.5%), and transient hydronephrosis in 1 (0.5%). There were no vascular, vesical, visceral or neurological injuries.
conclusionsThese results indicate that SDDG augmented cystocele repair is a safe procedure, with low morbidity, and it's success is comparable to other techniques.
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.