Evolution of biological and synthetic grafts in reconstructive pelvic surgery

Surgery is an evolving science in the attempt to make surgical procedures more effective, safer, and less invasive. Recurrence and subsequent re-operation for stress incontinence and prolapse has been reported to be necessary in one of three patients, so there is a need for improvement [1]. In reconstructive pelvic surgery (RPS), the use of biological and synthetic grafts for the transabdominal and transvaginal treatment of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) or stress urinary incontinence (SI) has improved long-term support and function after surgery. However, the potential benefits of using grafts need to be carefully balanced against the risks of using materials foreign to the patient's body. Pelvic organ prolapse develops secondary to defective endopelvic fascial and muscular support. The levator am provides resting tonic muscular support for all three pelvic compartments. Once neuromuscular damage occurs, extra strain is placed on the connective tissue supports, which may also subsequently fail. To date, there is no surgery that adequately addresses the issue of neuromuscular damage of the pelvic floor musculature. In conventional POP surgery, defective support is repaired by suturing of the patient's own connective tissue, fascia, or ligaments. The rationale for the use of grafts is to reinforce and strengthen pelvic organ repairs similar to the use of grafts to strengthen abdominal hernia repair.