Vaginal Prolapse Repair-Native Tissue Repair versus Mesh Augmentation: Newer Isn't Always Better

0Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to update the female urology and urogynecologic community on the controversy regarding approaches to vaginal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. We will review the salient issues in traditional, vaginal native-tissue (NT) repair for pelvic organ prolapse. We intend to provide arguments advocating vaginal NT repair over that of vaginal mesh-augmented (MA) repair, and to show that newer is not always better. © 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kim-Fine, S., Occhino, J. A., & Gebhart, J. B. (2013, March 1). Vaginal Prolapse Repair-Native Tissue Repair versus Mesh Augmentation: Newer Isn’t Always Better. Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports. Current Medicine Group LLC 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-012-0170-7

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free