Covid-19
Sunmedical logo
Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension: Benefits of a Cross-shaped Mesh to Treat Difficult Vaginal Vault Prolapse
2020 - Jean Dubuisson, Nikolaus Veit-Rubin, Jean Bouquet de Joliniere, and Jean-Bernard Dubuisson

Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension: Benefits of a Cross-shaped Mesh to Treat Difficult Vaginal Vault Prolapse

Supplementary data related to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2016.01.028

Laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh for apical and anterior pelvic organ prolapse: A prospective double center study
2020 - Liliana Mereu, Saverio Tateo, Maurizio Nicola D’Alterio, Eleonora Russo, Andrea Giannini, Paolo Mannella, Riccardo Pertile, Tommaso Cai, Tommaso Simoncini

The present study analyzed long-term outcomes and complications of laparoscopic lateral suspension (LLS) with mesh to treat apical and anterior pelvic organ prolapse

A prospective cohort study on 125 patients with vaginal bulge and apical +/ anterior prolapse scheduled for LLS who consecutively underwent LLS between April 2013 and January 2017 in Gynecologic Department of Santa Chiara Hospital in Trento and University of Pisa.

Results: 120 patients were included in the study. At 2 years 89 % of patients were asymptomatic and anatomic success rate was 94.2 % for the anterior compartment, 94.9 % for the apical compartment

Medium-term outcomes after robotic-assisted lateral suspension with mesh for advanced multi-compartmental prolapse
2019 - Eleonora Russo, Andrea Giannini, Magdalena Montt Guevara, Paolo Mannella, Giulia Misasi, Maria Falcone, Tommaso Simoncini

Medium-term outcomes after robotic-assisted lateral suspension with mesh for advanced multi-compartmental prolapse

This study completed a prospective case series of 115 RALS to treat apical and anterior prolapse stage III or IV, with no or minimal (stage I) posterior defect. Mean follow-up was 28 ± 4 months. Primary outcomes were objective and subjective cure; secondary outcomes were reoperation rate for recurrence, erosion rate and complications. 

Results There was a significant improvement in POP-Q score in all treated compartments with an objective cure rate of 88.7% for the anterior and 93.1% for the apical compartment (p < 0.0001)

Self-retaining support implant: an anchorless system for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse-2-year follow-up
2019 - Levy, Padoa, Fekete, Bartfai, Pajor, Cervigni

Self-retaining support implant: an anchorless system for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse-2-year follow-up

Introduction and hypothesis The search for an improved vag- inal mesh prompted the development of a new anchorless implant. The objective was to report on outcome after 2 years of a technique using a self-retaining support (SRS) implant.

Int Urogynecol J

Mesh versus acellular dermal matrix in immediate implantbased breast reconstructione A prospective randomized trial
2016 - D. Gschwantler-Kaulich, P. Schrenk, V. Bjelic-Radisic, K. Unterrieder, C. Leser, A. Fink-Retter, M. Salama, C. Singer

Mesh versus acellular dermal matrix in immediate implantbased breast reconstructione A prospective randomized trial

This prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter pilot study was performed at four Austrian breast cancer centers. Fifty patients with oncologic or prophylactic indication for mastectomy and IBBR were randomized to immediate IBBR with either an ADM(Protexa) or a titanized mesh (TiLOOPBra).

Da evidenziare sia il 30% di perdita di impianto nel gruppo di Protexa(contro il 7 % di tiloop),sia il miglior outcome estetico e grado di soddisfazione del gruppo Tiloop BRA.

Subcutaneous Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction: Surgical, Functional, and Aesthetic Results after Long-Term Follow-Up
2016 - Donato Casella ,Lorenzo Orzalesi, Marco Bernini, Claudio Calabrese, Jenny Roselli, Lorenzo Cecconi, Caterina Santi, Ulpjana Gjondedaj, Jacopo Nori, Alfonso Fausto

Subcutaneous Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction: Surgical, Functional, and Aesthetic Results after Long-Term Follow-Up

Aim of this study is to analyze the long-term results, both objective and subjective, of a previous nonrandomized trial comparing pre- pectoral (subcutaneous) and retropectoral breast reconstructions using Titanized Mesh

1 2 3 5