title: The use of biological materials in urogynecologic reconstruction:  a systematic review.
abstract: There are numerous randomized controlled trials examining biological materials in urogynecologic surgery. For prolapse surgery, the addition of a biological graft adds no benefit compared with native tissue repairs for rectocele repair. Conflicting data exist regarding cystocele repair. Synthetic mesh repairs provide superior anatomical support for sacral colpopexy and cystocele repair compared with biologic grafts. However, biological and synthetic mesh slings have equivalent success rates for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Contrary to prior assumptions that biologic grafts add tissue strength without graft-related complications, there appears to be no benefit to the use of biological materials for prolapse and incontinence surgery.
authors.affiliation: Washington, D.C. From the Section of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Washington Hospital Center, and Georgetown University School of Medicine.
authors.forename: Ladin A
authors.initials: LA
authors.lastname: Yurteri-Kaplan
authors.forename: Robert E
authors.initials: RE
authors.lastname: Gutman
mesh_terms: D062088:Acellular Dermis; D001672:Biocompatible Materials; D001705:Bioprosthesis; D052858:Cystocele / Q000601:surgery; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D005260:Female; D013509:Gynecologic Surgical Procedures / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D056887:Pelvic Organ Prolapse / Q000601:surgery; D011126:Polypropylenes; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; D019651:Plastic Surgery Procedures / Q000379:methods*; D020047:Rectocele / Q000601:surgery; D053825:Suburethral Slings; D013526:Surgical Mesh; D014549:Urinary Incontinence / Q000601:surgery; D013520:Urologic Surgical Procedures / Q000379:methods*
chemical_list: D001672:Biocompatible Materials; D011126:Polypropylenes