ReviewCurrent urology reports2019
Prolapse Repair Using Non-synthetic Material: What is the Current Standard?
Review in Current urology reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Expanding Horizons: Robotic Surgery in Functional and Reconstructive Urology.International neurourology journal · 2026Article
- Supramolecular Fibrous Hydrogel Augmentation of Uterosacral Ligament Suspension for Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse.Advanced healthcare materials · 2023Article
- Knowledge mapping and visualization analysis of pelvic organ prolapse repair with mesh from 2001 to 2021.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
- Autologous rectus fascia graft in the treatment of high-stage apical vaginal prolapse: preliminary results of a new surgical approach with native tissue.International urology and nephrology · 2022Article
- Ten years' follow-up after iliococcygeus fixation for the treatment of apical vaginal prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2021Article
- Cystocele Repair by a Modified Surgical Technique of Bilateral Pubococcygeus Plication: Long-Term Surgical and Functional Results.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Update in native tissue vaginal vault prolapse repair.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewDue to recent concerns over the use of synthetic mesh in pelvic floor reconstructive surgery, there has been a renewed interest in the utilization of non-synthetic repairs for pelvic organ prolapse. The purpose of this review is to review the current literature regarding pelvic organ prolapse repairs performed without the utilization of synthetic mesh. RECENT
findingsNative tissue repairs provide a durable surgical option for pelvic organ prolapse. Based on recent findings of recently performed randomized clinical trials with long-term follow-up, transvaginal native tissue repair continues to play a role in the management of pelvic organ prolapse without the added risk associated with synthetic mesh. In 2019, the FDA called for manufacturers of synthetic mesh for transvaginal mesh to stop selling and distributing their products in the USA. Native tissue and non-synthetic pelvic organ prolapse repairs provide an efficacious alternative without the added risk inherent to the utilization of transvaginal mesh. A recent, multicenter, randomized clinical trial demonstrated no clear advantage to the utilization of synthetic mesh. Furthermore, transvaginal native tissue repairs have demonstrated good long-term efficacy, particularly when anatomic success is not the sole metric used to define surgical success.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31612341What 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.