A multicenter, randomized trial comparing pelvic organ prolapse surgical treatment with native tissue and synthetic mesh: A 5-year follow-up study.

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare long-term outcomes in patients who underwent either native tissue repair or monofilament macroporous polypropylene mesh.

Related collections

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Neurourol Urodyn

Title: Neurourology and urodynamics

Publisher: Wiley

ISSN (Electronic): 1520-6777

ISSN (Print): 0733-2467

Publication date (Electronic): March 2020

Volume: 39

Issue: 3

Affiliations

[1 ] Division of Gynecology, University Hospital, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.

[2 ] Medical Science University of Holy House of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.

[3 ] Department of Medicine, Federal University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.

[4 ] Urogynecology Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, St George's Hospital, London, UK.

[5 ] Discipline of Gynecology, Clinic Hospital of Sao Paulo, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.

Article

DOI: 10.1002/nau.24323

PubMed ID: 32106344

SO-VID: 330aac1b-f877-48d9-abe2-dd949fa5013a

History

Keywords: complications,genital prolapse,mesh repair,native tissue repair,surgery

Data availability:

Keywords: complications, genital prolapse, mesh repair, native tissue repair, surgery

A multicenter, randomized trial comparing pelvic organ prolapse surgical treatment with native tissue and synthetic mesh: A 5-year follow-up study.

Read this article at

Abstract

Related collections

SICOT-J (Orthopedic surgery and traumatology)

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Article

History

Comments

Comment on this article

Cited by 9