↓ Skip to main content

The “Pelvic Harness”: a skeletonized mesh implant for safe pelvic floor reconstruction

Overview of attention for article published in International Brazilian Journal of Urology, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The “Pelvic Harness”: a skeletonized mesh implant for safe pelvic floor reconstruction
Published in
International Brazilian Journal of Urology, January 2016
DOI 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2015.0177
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sumerova Natalia, Neuman Menahem, Krissi Haim, Pushkar Dmitri

Abstract

To evaluate the feasibility, safety and surgical results of skeletonized mesh implants to form a pelvic harness for pelvic floor reconstruction surgery. Patients with advanced pelvic floor prolapse were enrolled to this study. Study model was a kit mesh, reduced to 75% of the original surface area by cutting out mesh material from the central mesh body. Patients were evaluated at the end of the 1st and 6th post-operative months and interviewed at the study conclusion. Ninety-five women with advanced pelvic floor prolapse had this implant. Mean follow-up duration was 9 months (6-12 months). The POP-Q point's measurements showed marked and statistically significant improvements. Bladder over-activity symptoms, fecal incontinence, pelvic pain and constipation rates were all reduced as well. No adverse effects related to the dissection or mesh implantation were marked. The first and sixth post-operative month follow-up records as well as the study conclusion interview findings were satisfactory in terms of subjective and objective cure and adverse effects occurrence. This study data proposes that skeletonizing meshes might be safely and successfully implanted for potentially improved pelvic floor reconstruction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 6 21%
Student > Master 4 14%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 7 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 28%
Unspecified 6 21%
Engineering 4 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 05 July 2016.
All research outputs
#6,963,859
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#122
of 726 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,305
of 399,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#10
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 726 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
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 399,677 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.