ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2017
A rat hysteropexy model for evaluating adhesion formation and comparison of two different structured meshes.
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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The use of animal models in preclinical investigations for the development of a surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisPeritonization of mesh during sacrohysteropexy is generally advocated to prevent adhesions to the viscera; however, randomized clinical trials are lacking, and peritonization may not be completely possible in a laparoscopic hysteropexy procedure. Our main objective was to describe a basic experimental rat sacrohysteropexy model. We hypothesized that even when peritoneal closure was omitted, using composite mesh would result in less adhesions to the viscera.
methodsTwenty in-bred female virgin Wistar Hannover rats were used in this study. Standardized hysteropexy procedure and adhesion model is described step by step with two different mesh materials: polypropylene and a composite polyester. Mesh was anchored between the posterior cervix and anterior longitudinal ligament of the lumbar vertebrae. Macroscopic adhesion scores and histopathological tissue reaction was investigated.
resultsMacroscopically, the surface area involved in adhesions was similar between groups. However, adhesions in the polypropylene group were more dense, required sharp dissection for lysis, and yielded higher total macroscopic adhesion scores (p < 0.001). Histologically, a more pronounced host inflammatory response was encountered in the polyester group (p < 0.001).
conclusionsWe describe a rat hysteropexy model and a previously established uterine adhesion model. Adhesion scores in the composite mesh group were lower, and bowel involvement was not seen. Our findings are promising, and further research investigating antiadhesive composite mesh use for hysterosacropexy would be appropriate, especially when peritoneal closure is omitted.
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.