The Experts below are selected from a list of 112182 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Huihsuan Lau - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
changes in female sexual function after vaginal mesh Repair versus native Tissue Repair for pelvic organ prolapse a meta analysis of randomized controlled trials
The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 2019Co-Authors: Saochun Liao, Wenchu Huang, Huihsuan LauAbstract:Abstract Aim To evaluate changes in female sexual function after transvaginal mesh (TVM) Repair versus native Tissue Repair for pelvic organ prolapse. Methods Eligible studies, published through November 2017, were retrieved through searches of ClinicalTrials.gov , MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Review databases and associated bibliographies. We included randomized control trials of transvaginal prolapse surgery with either mesh Repair or native Tissue Repair regarding the outcomes of sexual function, de novo and postoperative dyspareunia with a minimum of 3 months of follow-up. Results Seventeen trials including 2,976 patients (1,488 with TVM Repair and 1,488 with native Tissue Repair) were identified. There was no significant difference in postoperative dyspareunia after TVM Repair versus native Tissue Repair (risk ratio [RR] = 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.76–1.50). Likewise, there was no significant difference in de novo dyspareunia after TVM Repair versus native Tissue Repair (RR = 0.91; 95% CI = 0.52–1.61). There was also no significant difference in the short form Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire score after TVM mesh Repair versus native Tissue Repair (mean difference = 0.26; 95% CI = -1.34 to 1.85). Conclusion Sexual function and de novo and postoperative dyspareunia were similar between the patients who underwent TVM Repair and those who underwent native Tissue Repair. Liao S-C, Huang W-C, Su T-H, et al. Changes in Female Sexual Function After Vaginal Mesh Repair Versus Native Tissue Repair for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Sex Med 2019;16:633–639.
-
single incision mesh Repair versus traditional native Tissue Repair for pelvic organ prolapse results of a cohort study
International Urogynecology Journal, 2014Co-Authors: Huihsuan Lau, Wenchu Huang, Chinghung Hsieh, Rhuchu ChangAbstract:Introduction and hypothesis To compare the efficacy and safety of the Elevate™ anterior and posterior prolapse Repair system and traditional vaginal native Tissue Repair in the treatment of stage 2 or higher pelvic organ prolapse.
Marianne Glavindkristensen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
native Tissue Repair of isolated primary rectocele compared with nonabsorbable mesh patient reported outcomes
International Urogynecology Journal, 2017Co-Authors: L D Madsen, Emil Nussler, Ulrik Schioler Kesmodel, Susanne Greisen, Marianne GlavindkristensenAbstract:Introduction We evaluated patient-reported outcomes and complications after treatment of isolated primary rectocele in routine health-care settings using native-Tissue Repair or nonabsorbable mesh.
-
native Tissue Repair of isolated primary rectocele compared with nonabsorbable mesh patient reported outcomes
International Urogynecology Journal, 2017Co-Authors: L D Madsen, Emil Nussler, Ulrik Schioler Kesmodel, Susanne Greisen, Karl Moller Bek, Marianne GlavindkristensenAbstract:We evaluated patient-reported outcomes and complications after treatment of isolated primary rectocele in routine health-care settings using native-Tissue Repair or nonabsorbable mesh. We used prospective data from the Swedish National Register for Gynaecological Surgery and included 3988 women with a primary operation for rectocele between 2006 and 2014: 3908 women had native-Tissue Repair, 80 were operated with nonabsorbable mesh. No concurrent operations were performed. Pre- and perioperative data were collected from doctors and patients. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated 2 and 12 months after the operation. Only validated questionnaires were used. One year after native-Tissue Repair, 77.8 % (76.4–79.6) felt they were cured, which was defined as never or hardly ever feeling genital protrusion; 74.0 % (72.2–75.7) were very satisfied or satisfied, and 84 % (82.8–85.9) reported improvement of symptoms. After mesh Repair, 89.8 % (77.8–96.6) felt cured, 69.2 % (54.9–81.3) were very satisfied or satisfied, and 86.0 % (72.1–94.7) felt improvement. No significant differences were found between groups. Organ damage was found in 16 (0.4 %) patients in the native-Tissue Repair group compared with one (1.3 %) patient in the mesh group [odds ratio (OR) 3.08; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.07–20.30]. The rate of de novo dyspareunia after native-Tissue Repair was 33.1 % (30.4–35.8), comparable with that after mesh Repair. The reoperation rate was 1.1 % (0.8–1.5) in both groups. Most patients were cured and satisfied after native-Tissue Repair of the posterior vaginal wall, and the patient-reported outcomes were comparable with results after mesh Repair. The risk of serious complications and reoperation were comparable between groups.
L D Madsen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
native Tissue Repair of isolated primary rectocele compared with nonabsorbable mesh patient reported outcomes
International Urogynecology Journal, 2017Co-Authors: L D Madsen, Emil Nussler, Ulrik Schioler Kesmodel, Susanne Greisen, Marianne GlavindkristensenAbstract:Introduction We evaluated patient-reported outcomes and complications after treatment of isolated primary rectocele in routine health-care settings using native-Tissue Repair or nonabsorbable mesh.
-
native Tissue Repair of isolated primary rectocele compared with nonabsorbable mesh patient reported outcomes
International Urogynecology Journal, 2017Co-Authors: L D Madsen, Emil Nussler, Ulrik Schioler Kesmodel, Susanne Greisen, Karl Moller Bek, Marianne GlavindkristensenAbstract:We evaluated patient-reported outcomes and complications after treatment of isolated primary rectocele in routine health-care settings using native-Tissue Repair or nonabsorbable mesh. We used prospective data from the Swedish National Register for Gynaecological Surgery and included 3988 women with a primary operation for rectocele between 2006 and 2014: 3908 women had native-Tissue Repair, 80 were operated with nonabsorbable mesh. No concurrent operations were performed. Pre- and perioperative data were collected from doctors and patients. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated 2 and 12 months after the operation. Only validated questionnaires were used. One year after native-Tissue Repair, 77.8 % (76.4–79.6) felt they were cured, which was defined as never or hardly ever feeling genital protrusion; 74.0 % (72.2–75.7) were very satisfied or satisfied, and 84 % (82.8–85.9) reported improvement of symptoms. After mesh Repair, 89.8 % (77.8–96.6) felt cured, 69.2 % (54.9–81.3) were very satisfied or satisfied, and 86.0 % (72.1–94.7) felt improvement. No significant differences were found between groups. Organ damage was found in 16 (0.4 %) patients in the native-Tissue Repair group compared with one (1.3 %) patient in the mesh group [odds ratio (OR) 3.08; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.07–20.30]. The rate of de novo dyspareunia after native-Tissue Repair was 33.1 % (30.4–35.8), comparable with that after mesh Repair. The reoperation rate was 1.1 % (0.8–1.5) in both groups. Most patients were cured and satisfied after native-Tissue Repair of the posterior vaginal wall, and the patient-reported outcomes were comparable with results after mesh Repair. The risk of serious complications and reoperation were comparable between groups.
Wenchu Huang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
changes in female sexual function after vaginal mesh Repair versus native Tissue Repair for pelvic organ prolapse a meta analysis of randomized controlled trials
The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 2019Co-Authors: Saochun Liao, Wenchu Huang, Huihsuan LauAbstract:Abstract Aim To evaluate changes in female sexual function after transvaginal mesh (TVM) Repair versus native Tissue Repair for pelvic organ prolapse. Methods Eligible studies, published through November 2017, were retrieved through searches of ClinicalTrials.gov , MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Review databases and associated bibliographies. We included randomized control trials of transvaginal prolapse surgery with either mesh Repair or native Tissue Repair regarding the outcomes of sexual function, de novo and postoperative dyspareunia with a minimum of 3 months of follow-up. Results Seventeen trials including 2,976 patients (1,488 with TVM Repair and 1,488 with native Tissue Repair) were identified. There was no significant difference in postoperative dyspareunia after TVM Repair versus native Tissue Repair (risk ratio [RR] = 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.76–1.50). Likewise, there was no significant difference in de novo dyspareunia after TVM Repair versus native Tissue Repair (RR = 0.91; 95% CI = 0.52–1.61). There was also no significant difference in the short form Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire score after TVM mesh Repair versus native Tissue Repair (mean difference = 0.26; 95% CI = -1.34 to 1.85). Conclusion Sexual function and de novo and postoperative dyspareunia were similar between the patients who underwent TVM Repair and those who underwent native Tissue Repair. Liao S-C, Huang W-C, Su T-H, et al. Changes in Female Sexual Function After Vaginal Mesh Repair Versus Native Tissue Repair for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Sex Med 2019;16:633–639.
-
single incision mesh Repair versus traditional native Tissue Repair for pelvic organ prolapse results of a cohort study
International Urogynecology Journal, 2014Co-Authors: Huihsuan Lau, Wenchu Huang, Chinghung Hsieh, Rhuchu ChangAbstract:Introduction and hypothesis To compare the efficacy and safety of the Elevate™ anterior and posterior prolapse Repair system and traditional vaginal native Tissue Repair in the treatment of stage 2 or higher pelvic organ prolapse.
Youngjun Choi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a posterior approach to primary total hip arthroplasty with soft Tissue Repair
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 2004Co-Authors: Kuen Tak Suh, Byung Guk Park, Youngjun ChoiAbstract:To determine whether Repair of the posterior soft Tissue structures affects dislocation rate, a comparison of the posterolateral approach with and without a posterior soft Tissue Repair in primary total hip arthroplasty was done. Between January 1993 and December 1998, 250 consecutive primary total hip arthroplasties (220 patients) without a posterior soft Tissue Repair followed by 96 consecutive primary total hip arthroplasties (83 patients) with a posterior soft Tissue Repair in the posterolateral approach were done. With the exception of a posterior soft Tissue Repair, all surgical procedures were done in the same manner. A dislocation rate of 6.4% in 250 hips without a posterior soft Tissue Repair in the posterolateral approach was reduced to 1% in 96 hips with a posterior soft Tissue Repair. The results were statistically significant. The current results indicate that the posterior structures should be preserved as much as possible and Repaired to reduce dislocation in the posterolateral approach.
