To mesh or not to mesh

6Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Nepean Clinical School, University of Sydney, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia Correspondence: Professor Hans Peter Dietz, Nepean Clinical School, University of Sydney, Nepean Hospital, Penrith, NSW 2750, Australia. We are in the midst of an increasingly acrimonious discussion regarding the use of mesh in pelvic reconstructive surgery. Modern mesh kits, aggressively marketed by biotech companies, have become widespread. At times, they are used inappropriately, and significant complications such as pain syndromes and erosion are not uncommon. While conventional alternatives such as sacrospinous colpopexy and Burch colposuspension are not without their problems either, the discussion surrounding mesh use has a character never encountered before in urogynaecology. Many colleagues feel that the resolution of this conflict may be found in large randomised controlled trials such as the PROSPECT trial currently being planned in the UK. I feel that such a trial may well do more harm than good, unless certain precautions are taken. In this opinion piece I'll try and explain why. © 2009 The Author.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dietz, H. P. (2009, August). To mesh or not to mesh. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1479-828X.2009.01034.x

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