Vaginal Paravaginal Repair With Porcine Small Intestine Submucosa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: : This study aimed to determine the midterm efficacy of porcine small intestine submucosa for paravaginal repairs of anterior vaginal prolapse. METHODS: : One hundred five women underwent repairs between 2003 and 2006 and met our inclusion criteria. Women were invited to return for a pelvic examination and to fill out validated questionnaires. Objective failure was defined as anterior prolapse recurrence at or beyond the hymen. RESULTS: : Fifty-nine women (56%) were available for follow-up. Median age of patients was 60 years (range, 26-80 years) and 83% had a parity of 2 or more. Ninety-seven percent of patients had a preoperative prolapse stage of 2 or more. Follow-up ranged from 1 to 5 years (median, 27.5 months; interquartile range, 14.5). The most common postoperative complication was transient voiding dysfunction (23.7%). Objective cure rate was 68.8%. A positive change in bladder, vaginal, and bowel symptoms (a little better, much better, or very much better) was reported by 69.5%, 59.3%, and 25.5% of women, respectively. Thirty-one women (52.5%) were sexually active at postoperative follow-up. Only 4 women (6.8%) were not sexually active because of pelvic symptoms. Dyspareunia was reported by 8.3% of the 48 women who returned for a clinic follow-up. Twenty-four women (40.7%) were not sexually active postoperatively, for reasons unrelated to their surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: : Vaginal paravaginal repair using porcine xenograft is a safe procedure whose long-term efficacy needs further evaluation through prospective trials.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".