ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
Prolift Versus IVS for Pelvic Floor Prolapse
* Women who underwent mesh or sling procedures to correct pelvic organ prolapse will be enrolled. * Their data will be collected from the files. * Comparison between two groups will be carried our: Those who underwent a posterior IVS and those who underwent posterior prolift procedure. * The data will be obtained by questionaires by a telephone interview by a physician who did not participate in the surgery. * Follow-up physical examination data will also be obtained.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Clinical Performance of the GYNECARE PROLIFT + M* Pelvic Floor Repair System as a Device for Pelvic Organ Prolapse#969029
- GYNECARE PROSIMA* Procedure Versus Modified Total Pelvic Floor Reconstructive Surgery for Uterine Prolapse Stage III#1127176
- Apical Support During Hysterectomy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse-NSQIP Analysis.#828408
- Anterior Prolift Versus Posterior Prolift for Pelvic Floor Prolapse#1096158
- Outcomes After Sacrocolpopexy With and Without Burch to Prevent Stress Urinary Incontinence in 3rd and 4th Degree Apical Uterine Prolapse#1072630
Record · ID 811636
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive