Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
BioMed Research International
Volume 2015, Article ID 968087, 20 pages
Review Article

Biomaterials for Pelvic Floor Reconstructive Surgery: How Can We Do Better?

1Material Science Engineering, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S1 3JD, UK
2Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield S10 2JF, UK
3Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, 05410-020 São Paulo, Brazil

Received 25 June 2014; Accepted 19 August 2014

Academic Editor: Uwe Klinge

Copyright © 2015 Giulia Gigliobianco et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) are major health issues that detrimentally impact the quality of life of millions of women worldwide. Surgical repair is an effective and durable treatment for both conditions. Over the past two decades there has been a trend to enforce or reinforce repairs with synthetic and biological materials. The determinants of surgical outcome are many, encompassing the physical and mechanical properties of the material used, and individual immune responses, as well surgical and constitutional factors. Of the current biomaterials in use none represents an ideal. Biomaterials that induce limited inflammatory response followed by constructive remodelling appear to have more long term success than biomaterials that induce chronic inflammation, fibrosis and encapsulation. In this review we draw upon published animal and human studies to characterize the changes biomaterials undergo after implantation and the typical host responses, placing these in the context of clinical outcomes.