Porcine skin collagen implants for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomised prospective controlled study

Ulla Hviid; Thomas Vauvert F Hviid; Martin Rudnicki

doi:10.1007/s00192-009-1018-3

Porcine skin collagen implants for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomised prospective controlled study

Ulla Hviid, Thomas Vauvert F Hviid, Martin Rudnicki

Department of Clinical Medicine

34 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis: The effect of a Pelvicol® graft compared with a conventional anterior vaginal repair was evaluated in this randomised controlled study. Methods: Only patients with a stage II or higher (Ba≥-1) defect were included. Results: Thirty-one patients were allocated to a conventional anterior repair; 30 to Pelvicol® graft. At 12 months follow-up, four patients among controls (15%) and two in the graft group (7%) had objective recurrence. Among controls, the difference at 3 months follow-up in Ba was 6.0 cm when compared with the position of Ba prior to surgery. In the graft group, the difference was 7.0 cm (P<0.05). This difference was still present at 12 months follow-up (6.0 vs. 7.0 cm; P<0.05). Conclusions: The implantation of a Pelvicol® graft does not improve the POP-Q stage.

Original language	English
Journal	International Urogynecology Journal
Volume	21
Issue number	5
Pages (from-to)	529-34
Number of pages	6
ISSN	0937-3462
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-1018-3
Publication status	Published - May 2010

Keywords

Animals
Bioprosthesis
Collagen
Female
Humans
Middle Aged
Prospective Studies
Skin Transplantation
Swine
Uterine Prolapse
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial

Access to Document

10.1007/s00192-009-1018-3

Cite this

@article{94247011291a4e6f97343bdacdf4868f,

title = "Porcine skin collagen implants for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomised prospective controlled study",

abstract = "Introduction and hypothesis: The effect of a Pelvicol{\textregistered} graft compared with a conventional anterior vaginal repair was evaluated in this randomised controlled study. Methods: Only patients with a stage II or higher (Ba≥-1) defect were included. Results: Thirty-one patients were allocated to a conventional anterior repair; 30 to Pelvicol{\textregistered} graft. At 12 months follow-up, four patients among controls (15%) and two in the graft group (7%) had objective recurrence. Among controls, the difference at 3 months follow-up in Ba was 6.0 cm when compared with the position of Ba prior to surgery. In the graft group, the difference was 7.0 cm (P<0.05). This difference was still present at 12 months follow-up (6.0 vs. 7.0 cm; P<0.05). Conclusions: The implantation of a Pelvicol{\textregistered} graft does not improve the POP-Q stage.",

keywords = "Animals, Bioprosthesis, Collagen, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Skin Transplantation, Swine, Uterine Prolapse, Journal Article, Randomized Controlled Trial",

author = "Ulla Hviid and Hviid, {Thomas Vauvert F} and Martin Rudnicki",

year = "2010",

month = may,

doi = "10.1007/s00192-009-1018-3",

language = "English",

volume = "21",

pages = "529--34",

journal = "International Urogynecology Journal",

issn = "0937-3462",

publisher = "Springer",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Porcine skin collagen implants for anterior vaginal wall prolapse

T2 - a randomised prospective controlled study

AU - Hviid, Ulla

AU - Hviid, Thomas Vauvert F

AU - Rudnicki, Martin

PY - 2010/5

Y1 - 2010/5

N2 - Introduction and hypothesis: The effect of a Pelvicol® graft compared with a conventional anterior vaginal repair was evaluated in this randomised controlled study. Methods: Only patients with a stage II or higher (Ba≥-1) defect were included. Results: Thirty-one patients were allocated to a conventional anterior repair; 30 to Pelvicol® graft. At 12 months follow-up, four patients among controls (15%) and two in the graft group (7%) had objective recurrence. Among controls, the difference at 3 months follow-up in Ba was 6.0 cm when compared with the position of Ba prior to surgery. In the graft group, the difference was 7.0 cm (P<0.05). This difference was still present at 12 months follow-up (6.0 vs. 7.0 cm; P<0.05). Conclusions: The implantation of a Pelvicol® graft does not improve the POP-Q stage.

AB - Introduction and hypothesis: The effect of a Pelvicol® graft compared with a conventional anterior vaginal repair was evaluated in this randomised controlled study. Methods: Only patients with a stage II or higher (Ba≥-1) defect were included. Results: Thirty-one patients were allocated to a conventional anterior repair; 30 to Pelvicol® graft. At 12 months follow-up, four patients among controls (15%) and two in the graft group (7%) had objective recurrence. Among controls, the difference at 3 months follow-up in Ba was 6.0 cm when compared with the position of Ba prior to surgery. In the graft group, the difference was 7.0 cm (P<0.05). This difference was still present at 12 months follow-up (6.0 vs. 7.0 cm; P<0.05). Conclusions: The implantation of a Pelvicol® graft does not improve the POP-Q stage.

KW - Animals

KW - Bioprosthesis

KW - Collagen

KW - Female

KW - Humans

KW - Middle Aged

KW - Prospective Studies

KW - Skin Transplantation

KW - Swine

KW - Uterine Prolapse

KW - Journal Article

KW - Randomized Controlled Trial

U2 - 10.1007/s00192-009-1018-3

DO - 10.1007/s00192-009-1018-3

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 20165833

SN - 0937-3462

VL - 21

SP - 529

EP - 534

JO - International Urogynecology Journal

JF - International Urogynecology Journal

IS - 5

ER -

Porcine skin collagen implants for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomised prospective controlled study

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this