非吸收性与部分吸收性网片用于前阴道壁脱垂修复的长期结局（5-10年）

数据集获取（Figshare）

• 源站标题：Long-term outcome (5-10 years) after non absorbable mesh insertion compared to partially absorbable mesh insertion for anterior vaginal wall prolapse repair
• DOI：10.6084/m9.figshare.11452842.v1
• 发布日期：2019-12-25
• 文件数：1 个
• 文件总体积：9.73 KB
• 源站页面：https://scielo.figshare.com/articles/dataset/Long-term_outcome_5-10_years_after_non_absorbable_mesh_insertion_compared_to_partially_absorbable_mesh_insertion_for_anterior_vaginal_wall_prolapse_repair/11452842

命令行下载

curl -L -o "Table_1.xls" "https://ndownloader.figshare.com/files/20436507"

文件清单

• Table_1.xls（9.73 KB）

文件总体积 9.73 KB（源站 API 实测）。

数据加载示例（图像类）

from PIL import Image
import glob, os

files = (glob.glob(os.path.join(path, "**", "*.png"), recursive=True)
       + glob.glob(os.path.join(path, "**", "*.jpg"), recursive=True)
       + glob.glob(os.path.join(path, "**", "*.tif"), recursive=True))
print("图像文件数:", len(files))
img = Image.open(files[0]); print("尺寸/模式:", img.size, img.mode)

# torchvision Dataset 方式:
# from torchvision import datasets
# ds = datasets.ImageFolder(path)  # 要求 子目录=类别

目录组织与标注格式以源站说明和下载后实际文件为准。

数据说明

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate long-term (5-10 years) outcomes of Minimally Invasive Surgical (MIS) kit insertion with Prolift® (non-absorbable) mesh compared to the use of Prolift M® (partially absorbable), for anterior vaginal wall prolapse repair. Study design: In this retrospective study we compared women undergoing MIS kit Prolift® insertion (n=90) vs. Prolift M® insertion (n=79) for anterior vaginal wall prolapse repair between 2006 and 2012 at our Institution. A number of 169 women fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. Results: During the study period 128 women (76%) completed full follow-up; of them 58 (73%) following MIS kit Prolift® insertion, and 70 (88%) following MIS kit ProliftM® insertion. There was no significant difference between the Prolift® and Prolift M® regarding parity (3.04 vs. 2.88, p=0.506), presence of hypertension (24.1% vs. 39.1%, p=0.088), diabetes mellitus (3.4% vs. 11.6%, p=0.109), or urinary stress incontinence (39.7% vs. 47.1%, p=0.475). All participants had been diagnosed with POP grade 3 or 4 before the procedure. No significant complications during the procedure or postoperative period were identified in the study groups. The follow-up period was at least five years in duration for both groups. Both groups were comparable according to questionnaires focused on function and satisfaction. Conclusion: Patients undergoing MIS kit Prolift® and Prolift M® insertion for anterior vaginal wall prolapse repair had comparable early and late postoperative outcomes. No differences in patient’'s function and satisfaction between the two groups were identified. According to our findings, there is no superiority to either of the two studied mesh devices.

许可

CC BY 4.0

引用

学术使用请引用 DOI 10.6084/m9.figshare.11452842.v1（source: https://scielo.figshare.com/articles/dataset/Long-term_outcome_5-10_years_after_non_absorbable_mesh_insertion_compared_to_partially_absorbable_mesh_insertion_for_anterior_vaginal_wall_prolapse_repair/11452842）。