ArticleScientific reports2022
Comparison of a human acellular dermal matrix and a polypropylene mesh for pelvic floor reconstruction: a randomized trial study in a rabbit model.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tissue engineering as a tool in a novel approach to the comprehensive treatment and management of a deeply and extensively burned patient: case report.Cell and tissue banking · 2025Article
- Application of human breast acellular dermal matrix (hbADM) in sling surgery for female stress urinary incontinence: a phase 1 clinical trial.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Learning curve analysis of transvaginal pelvic reconstruction surgery with four-wing mesh.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Orthogonally woven 3D nanofiber scaffolds promote rapid soft tissue regeneration by enhancing bidirectional cell migration.Bioactive materials · 2024Article
- Acellular Dermal Matrices as an New Alternative for Treatment in Reproductive Organ Static Disorders: A Pilot Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Advances in vaginal bioengineering: Applications, techniques, and needs.Current research in physiology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-absorbable polypropylene (PP) meshes have been widely used in surgical reconstruction of the pelvic floor disorders. However, they are associated with serious complications. Human acellular dermal matrices (hADM) have demonstrated safety and efficacy in reconstructive medicine, but their suitability and efficacy at vaginal level is not known. This study compares the biological performance of PP mesh and a newly developed hADM. 20 rabbits were randomized to receive the hADM graft or the PP mesh. Grafts were surgically implanted in the abdominal wall and vagina. After 180 days, grafts were explanted and evaluated. The vaginal mesh extrusion rate was higher in the PP group (33% vs. 0%, p = 0.015). Full integration of the vaginal grafts was more frequent in the hADM group, where 35% of the grafts were difficult to recognize. In the PP group, the vaginal mesh was identified in 100% of the animals (p = 0.014). In PP group, the infiltrates had a focal distribution and were mostly located in the internal part of the epithelium, while in the hADM group, the infiltrates had a diffuse distribution. Additionally, the hADM group also presented more B-lymphocytes and less T-lymphocytes. Biomechanical analysis showed that hADM had lower resistance to stress. Moreover, PP mesh stiffness and elasticity were higher. Then, hADM is associated with fewer clinical complications, as well as better tissue integration. However, it shows greater incorporation into the surrounding native tissue, especially in the vaginal location, undergoing a reduction in its biomechanical properties 6 months after implantation.
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.