The role of biologics in pelvic floor surgery

Ahmad, Mukhtar; Sileri, Pierpaolo; Franceschilli, Luana; Mercer-Jones, Mark

doi:10.1111/codi.12045

Cited by 24 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Perineal and transabdominal approaches have been proposed for the surgical treatment of patients with a rectal prolapse [5]. The abdominal approach is associated with better outcome and lower recurrence rate, but higher mortality, and the recent introduction of a laparoscopic approach has reduced postoperative complications and the length of hospital stay [6]. Laparoscopic rectopexy is the most commonly used transabdominal surgical technique.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Synthetic Versus Biological Mesh-Related Erosion After Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy: A Systematic Review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis review reports the incidence of mesh-related erosion after ventral mesh rectopexy to determine whether any difference exists in the erosion rate between synthetic and biological mesh.MethodsA systematic search of the MEDLINE and the Ovid databases was conducted to identify suitable articles published between 2004 and 2015. The search strategy capture terms were laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy, laparoscopic anterior rectopexy, robotic ventral rectopexy, and robotic anterior rectopexy.ResultsEight studies (3,956 patients) were included in this review. Of those patients, 3,517 patients underwent laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) using synthetic mesh and 439 using biological mesh. Sixty-six erosions were observed with synthetic mesh (26 rectal, 32 vaginal, 8 recto-vaginal fistulae) and one (perineal erosion) with biological mesh. The synthetic and the biological mesh-related erosion rates were 1.87% and 0.22%, respectively. The time between rectopexy and diagnosis of mesh erosion ranged from 1.7 to 124 months. No mesh-related mortalities were reported.ConclusionThe incidence of mesh-related erosion after LVR is low and is more common after the placement of synthetic mesh. The use of biological mesh for LVR seems to be a safer option; however, large, multicenter, randomized, control trials with long follow-ups are required if a definitive answer is to be obtained.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Synthetic mesh is much more widely used than biological mesh during a rectopexy, but no consensus regarding which type of mesh to use has been achieved [6]. Mesh-related pelvic structures erosion after rectopexy has been described in the literature [2], but data on the incidence of erosion based on the mesh type are lacking.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthetic Versus Biological Mesh-Related Erosion After Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy: A Systematic Review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our observations suggest that surgeons' increased familiarity with APs (both open operations and laparoscopy) might be associated with lower recurrence. Some studies [20,21] suggested that the learning curve for AP might be responsible for recurrences. In the PP group, the recurrence rates are consistent with the rates that have been reported previously: 0%-20% for Altemeier's procedure [22], and 4%-38% for Delorme's procedure [11].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of abdominal and perineal procedures for complete rectal prolapse: an analysis of 104 patients

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeSelecting the best surgical approach for treating complete rectal prolapse involves comparing the operative and functional outcomes of the procedures. The aims of this study were to evaluate and compare the operative and functional outcomes of abdominal and perineal surgical procedures for patients with complete rectal prolapse.MethodsA retrospective study of patients with complete rectal prolapse who had operations at a tertiary referral hospital and a university hospital between March 1990 and May 2011 was conducted. Patients were classified according to the type of operation: abdominal procedure (AP) (n = 64) or perineal procedure (PP) (n = 40). The operative outcomes and functional results were assessed.ResultsThe AP group had the younger and more men than the PP group. The AP group had longer operation times than the PP group (165 minutes vs. 70 minutes; P = 0.001) and longer hospital stays (10 days vs. 7 days; P = 0.001), but a lower overall recurrence rate (6.3% vs. 15.0%; P = 0.14). The overall rate of the major complication was similar in the both groups (10.9% vs. 6.8%; P = 0.47). The patients in the AP group complained more frequently of constipation than of incontinence, conversely, in the PP group of incontinence than of constipation.ConclusionThe two approaches for treating complete rectal prolapse did not differ with regard to postoperative morbidity, but the overall recurrence tended to occur frequently among patients in the PP group. Functional results after each surgical approach need to be considered for the selection of procedure.

show abstract

“…An increasing amount of published data show functional improvement in terms of FI (4-91 %), constipation (37-86 %) [2,3,5,6] and dyspareunia and sexual dysfunction (39 %) [6] for patients with internal and external RP treated with LVR. These functional outcomes are usually obtained using synthetic mesh for rectal suspension which has been shown to increase the efficacy of the reconstructive procedure while reducing the recurrence rate by 30 % [7], compared with pexies without mesh.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy using biologic mesh for the treatment of obstructed defaecation syndrome and/or faecal incontinence in patients with internal rectal prolapse: a critical appraisal of the first 100 cases

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The role of biologics in pelvic floor surgery

Cited by 24 publications

References 15 publications

Synthetic Versus Biological Mesh-Related Erosion After Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy: A Systematic Review

Synthetic Versus Biological Mesh-Related Erosion After Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy: A Systematic Review

Comparison of abdominal and perineal procedures for complete rectal prolapse: an analysis of 104 patients

Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy using biologic mesh for the treatment of obstructed defaecation syndrome and/or faecal incontinence in patients with internal rectal prolapse: a critical appraisal of the first 100 cases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About