|
Keywords
|
Pelvic organ prolapse Native repair Transvaginal mesh |
|
Target Audience
|
Urogynaecologists and Urologists with an activity in vaginal prolapse surgery |
|
Aims and Objectives
|
There has been intense debate about the use of synthetic meshes in vaginal prolapse surgery given the existence of a highly efficient alternative, which is traditional native tissue repair. Although a graft inlay seems to reduce the risk of recurrence, a main complication related to its use is erosion in the vagina. In 2011, after the FDA warning, many transvaginal meshes were voluntarily withdrawn from the market under economic and juridical pressure and the debates were increasingly dominated by emotion rather than scientific facts. Although there is a decrease in the use of meshes, there has been significant improvement in the quality of material with promising results in the hands of skilled surgeons familiar with traditional techniques
Learning Objectives - • Detail the different techniques of native and prothetic vaginal prolapse surgery.
• Provide an update on the newest available evidence in both native tissue repair and transvaginal mesh surgery
• Engage a factual debate based on case studies between the panel and the audience and assess the change of habits in participants before and after the workshop
|