| Title |
An innovative approach to treating vaginal mesh exposure after abdominal sacral colpopexy: endoscopic resection of mesh and platelet-rich plasma; initial experience in three women
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00192-016-3154-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniele Castellani, Alessandra Valloni, Angela Piccirilli, Giuseppe Paradiso Galatioto, Carlo Vicentini |
| Abstract |
Polypropylene mesh exposure is uncommon after abdominal sacral colpopexy (ASC), but in case of symptomatic vaginal mesh exposure, surgery is needed. When treating it, care must be taken to completely remove the exposed mesh (EM), saving as much vaginal tissue as possible to avoid a subsequent shortened and narrowed vagina. In this video, we present a minimally invasive technique for treating EM after ASC using endoscopic mesh resection and autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) technology. Three women were referred to our outpatient clinic for vaginal vault mesh exposure after laparoscopic ASC with concomitant hysterectomy. All women underwent endoscopic bipolar PlasmaKinetic resection (BPR) of EM, and PRP gel was delivered in the surgical site to cover the gap left by the resection. Mean operative time was 39.6 min. Surgery was uneventful in all cases. All women recovered sexual function, and nobody experienced relapsed pelvic organ prolapse at 1-year follow-up. Our preliminary results show that BPR and PRP are safe, effective, and feasible for treating vaginal mesh exposure with conservation of anatomy and sexual function. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 50% |
| Italy | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 13% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 7% |
| Researcher | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 18 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 38% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 August 2017.
All research outputs
#16,047,334
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#1,765
of 2,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,777
of 328,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#26
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,376 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.