SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

Referencias del artículo

SINISCALCHI, R. et al. Efectos biomecánicos de la inclusión de orificios facilitadores de la integración en mallas de polipropileno monofilamento: estudio experimental. Actas Urol Esp [online]. 2011, vol.35, n.10, pp.599-604. ISSN 0210-4806.

    1. Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstron JO, Colling JC, Clark AL. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 89:501-6. [ Links ]

    2. Shull BL. Pelvic organ prolapse: anterior, superior, and posterior vaginal segment defects. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 181:6-11. [ Links ]

    3. Yan A, Anne M, Karine A, Vanessa F, Christophe P, Anne T, et al. Cystocele repair by a synthetic vaginal mesh secured anteriorly through the obturator foramen. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2004; 115:90-4. [ Links ]

    4. Weber AM, Walters MD, Piedmonte MR, Ballard LA. Anterior colporrhaphy: a randomised trial of three surgical techniques. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 185:1299-306. [ Links ]

    5. Hardiman P, Oyawoye S, Browning J. Cystocele repair using polypropylene mesh. Br J Obstet Gynecol. 2000; 107:825-6. [ Links ]

    6. Depreste J, Zheng F, Konstantinovic M, Spelzini F, Claerhout F, Steensma A, et al. The biology behind fascial defects and the use of implants in pelvic organ prolapse repair. Int Urogynecol J. 2006; 17:S16-25. [ Links ]

    7. Birch C, Fynes MM. The role of synthetic and biological prostheses in reconstructive pelvic floor surgery. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 14:527-35. [ Links ]

    8. Dwyer PL. Evolution of biological and synthetic grafts in reconstructive pelvic surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2006; S10-5. [ Links ]

    9. Dora CD, Dimarco DS, Zobitz ME, Elliott DS. Time dependent variations in biomechanical properties of cadaveric fascia, porcine dermis, porcine small intestine submucosa, polypropylene mesh and autologous fascia in the rabbit model: implications for sling surgery. Urology. 2004; 171:1970-3. [ Links ]

    10. Davila GW. Introduction to the 2005 IUGA Grafts Roundtable. Int Urogynecol J. 2006; 17:S4-5. [ Links ]

    11. Rosch R, Junge K, Hölzl F. How to construct a mesh. En: Schumpelick V., Nyhus L.M., editors. Messhes: benefits and risks. Berlin: Springer; 2004. 179-84. [ Links ]

    12. Adhoute F, Soyeur L, Pariente JL, Le Guillou M, Ferriere JM. Use of transvaginal polypropylene mesh (Gynemesh) for the treatment of pelvic floor disorders in women, Prospective study in 52 patients. Prog Urol. 2004; 14:192-6. [ Links ]

    13. Krause HG, Galloway SJ, Khoo SK, Lourie R, Goh JT. Biocompatible properties of surgical mesh using an animal model. Oust N Z J Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 46:42-5. [ Links ]

    14. Theil M, Palma PCR, Riccetto CLZ, Dambros M, Netto NR. A sterological analysis of fibrosis and inflammatory reaction induced by four different synthetic slings. BJU Int. 2005; 95:833-7. [ Links ]

    15. Gomelsky A, Dmochowski RR. Biocompatibility assessment of synthetic sling materials for female stress urinary incontinence. J Urol. 2007; 178:1171-81. [ Links ]

    16. Achtari C, Hiscock R, O´reilly BA, Schierlitz L, Dwyer PL. Risk factors for mesh erosion after transvaginal surgery using polypropylene (Atrium) or composite polypropylene/polyglactin 910 (Vypro II) mesh. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2005; 16:389-94. [ Links ]

    17. Kobashi KC, Govier FE. Management of vaginal erosion of polypropylene mesh slings. J Urol. 2003; 169:2242-3. [ Links ]

    18. Jamieson DJ, Steege JF. The prevalence of dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, pelvic pain, and irritable bowel syndrome in primary care practices. Obstet Gynecol. 1996; 87:55-8. [ Links ]

    19. Martins PALS, Jorge RMN, Ferreira AJM. A comparative study of several material models for prediction of hyperelastic properties: Application to Silicone-Rubber and Soft Tissues. Strain. 2006; 42:135-47. [ Links ]

    20. Ghoniem GM, Kapoor DS. Nonautologous sling materials. Curr Urol Rep. 2001; 2:357-63. [ Links ]

    21. Amid PK, Lichtenstein IL, Shulman AG, Hakakha M. Biomaterials for "tension-free" hernioplasties and principles of their applications. Minerva Chir. 1995; 50:821-6. [ Links ]

    22. Yildirim A, Basok EK, Gulpinar T, Gurbuz C, Zemheri E, Tokuc R. Tissue reactions of 5 sling materials and tissue material detachment strength of 4 synthetic mesh materials in a rabbit model. J Urol. 2005; 174:2037-40. [ Links ]

    23. Bazi TM, Hamade RF, Hussein IAH, Nader KA, Jurjus A. Polypropylene midurethral tapes do not have similar biologic and biomechanical performance in the rat. Eur Urol. 2006; 51:1364-75. [ Links ]

    24. Cosson M. Risk of infection and prostheses: time out or a red flag?. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod. 2004; 33:559-60. [ Links ]

    25. Versi E, Harvey MA, Cardozo L, Brincat M, Studd JW. Urogenital prolapse and atrophy at menopause: a prevalence study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2001; 12:107-10. [ Links ]

    26. Petros PE. Repairing Damage Fascia: Ongoing and post operative considerations. Berlin: Springer; 2007. p. 108. [ Links ]

    27. Bellón JM, Jurado F, García-Honduvilla N, López R, Carrera-San Martin A, Buján J. The structure of a biomaterial rather than its chemical composition modulates the repair process at the peritoneal level. Am J Surg. 2002; 14:154-9. [ Links ]

    28. Greca FH, De Paula JB, Biondo-Simoes MPL, Costa FD, Da Silva APG, Time S, et al. The influence of differing pore sizes on the biocompatibility of two polypropylene meshes in the repair of abdominal defect: Experimental study in dogs. Hernia. 2001; 5:59-64. [ Links ]

    29. Bellón JM, Rodríguez M, García-Honduvilla N, Gómez-Gil V, Pascual G, Buján J. Comparing the behavior of different polypropylene meshes (heavy and lightweight) in an experimental model of ventral hernia repair. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2009; 89B:448-55. [ Links ]

    30. Afonso JS, Martins PALS, Girão MJB. Mechanical properties of polypropylene mesh used in pelvic floor repair. Int Urogynecol J. 2008; 19:375-80. [ Links ]

    31. Kubricht WS, Williams J, Eastham JA. Tensile strength of cadaveric fascia lata compared to small instestinal sub mucosa using suture pull through analysis. J Urol. 2001; 165:486-90. [ Links ]