Author:
van Zanten Femke,van Iersel Jan J.,Paulides Tim J. C.,Verheijen Paul M.,Broeders Ivo A. M. J.,Consten Esther C. J.,Lenters Egbert,Schraffordt Koops Steven E.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Urology,Obstetrics and Gynecology
Reference91 articles.
1. FDA. Food and Drug Administration. FDA safety communication: Urogynecologic surgical mesh: update on the safety and effectiveness of transvaginal placement for pelvic organ prolapse. Rev lit arts am. Available at:
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/medical
. 2011. Accessed 28 November 2016.
2. Abed H, Rahn DD, Lowenstein L, Balk EM, Clemons JL, Rogers RG, for the systematic review group of the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons. Incidence and management of graft erosion, wound granulation, and dyspareunia following vaginal prolapse repair with graft materials: a systematic review. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22:789–98.
3. Dandolu V, Akiyama M, Allenback G, Pathak P. Mesh complications and failure rates after transvaginal mesh repair compared with abdominal or laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and to native tissue repair in treating apical prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;28:215–22.
4. Serati M, Bogani G, Sorice P, Braga A, Torella M, Salvatore S, et al. Robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol. 2014;66:303–18.
5. Paraiso MFR, Jelovsek JE, Frick A, Chen CCG, Barber MD. Laparoscopic compared with robotic sacrocolpopexy for vaginal prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118:1005–13.
Cited by
18 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献