Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

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

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL (2001) Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 89:501–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Nguyen JK (2001) Current concepts in the diagnosis and surgical repair of anterior vaginal prolapse due to paravaginal defects. Obstet Gynecol Surv 56:239–246

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Richardson AC, Edmonds PB, Williams NL (1981) Treatment of stress urinary incontinence due to paravaginal fascial defect. Obstet Gynecol 57:357–362

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Delancey JO (2002) Fascial and muscular abnormalities in women with urethral hypermobility and anterior vaginal wall prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 187:93–99

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Tunn R, Rieprich M, Kaufmann O, Gauruder-Burmester A, Beyersdorff D (2005) Morphology of the suburethral pubocervical fascia in women with stress urinary incontinence: a comparison of histologic and MRI findings. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 16:480–486

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Morse AN, O’Dell KK, Hovard AE, Baker SP, Aronson MP, Young SB (2007) Midline anterior repair alone vs anterior repair plus vaginal paravaginal repair: a comparison of anatomic and quality of life outcome. Int Urogynecol J 18:245–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Weber AM, Walters MD, Piedmonte MR, Ballard LA (2001) Anterior colporrhaphy: a randomized trial of three surgical techniques. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:1299–1304

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sand PK, Koduri S, Lobel RW, Winkler HA, Tomezsko J, Culligan PJ, Goldberg R (2001) Prospective randomized trial of polyglactin 910 mesh to prevent recurrence of cystoceles and rectoceles. Am J Obstet Gynecol 184:1357–1362

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Raz S, Little NA, Juma S, Sussman EM (1991) Repair of severe anterior vaginal wall prolapse (grade IV cystourethrocele). J Urol 146:988–992

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Handel LN, Frenkl TL, Kim YH (2007) Results of cystocele repair: a comparison of traditional anterior colporrhaphy, polypropylene mesh and porcine dermis. J Urol 178:153–156

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nguyen JN, Burchette RJ (2008) Outcome after anterior vaginal prolapse repair. Obstet Gynecol 111:981–988

    Google Scholar 

  12. Altman D, Väyrynen T, Engh ME, Axelsen S, Falconer C (2008) Short-term outcome after transvaginal mesh repair of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 19:787–793

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Meschia M, Pifarotti P, Bernasconi F, Magatti F, Riva D, Kocjancic E (2007) Porcine skin collagen implants to prevent anterior vaginal wall prolapse recurrence: a multicenter, randomized study. J Urol 177:192–195

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. David-Montefiore E, Barranger E, Dubernard G, Detchev R, Nizard V, Daraï E (2005) Treatment of genital prolapse by hammock using porcine skin collagen implant (Pelvicol). Urology 66(6):1314–1318

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. de Tayrac R, Devoldere G, Renaudie J, Villard P, Guilbaud O, Eglin G, French Ugytex Study Group (2007) Prolapse repair by vaginal route using a new protected low-weight polypropylene mesh: 1-year functional and anatomical outcome in a prospective multicentre study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18:251–256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Maher C, Baessler K, Glazener CM, Adams EJ, Hagen S (2008) Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women: a short version Cochrane review. Neurourol Urodyn 27:3–12

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rudnicki M (2007) Biomesh (Pelvicol) erosion following repair of anterior vaginal wall prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18:693–695

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Rudnicki.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hviid, U., Hviid, T.V.F. & Rudnicki, M. Porcine skin collagen implants for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomised prospective controlled study. Int Urogynecol J 21, 529–534 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-1018-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-1018-3

Keywords

Navigation