Synthetic Versus Biological Mesh-Related Erosion After Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy: A Systematic Review

Overview

Journal Ann Coloproctol

Date 2017 May 16

PMID 28503515

Citations 22

Authors

Andrea Balla

Silvia Quaresima

Sebastian Smolarek

Mostafa Shalaby

Giulia Missori

Pierpaolo Sileri

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: This review reports the incidence of mesh-related erosion after ventral mesh rectopexy to determine whether any difference exists in the erosion rate between synthetic and biological mesh.

Methods: A systematic search of the MEDLINE and the Ovid databases was conducted to identify suitable articles published between 2004 and 2015. The search strategy capture terms were laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy, laparoscopic anterior rectopexy, robotic ventral rectopexy, and robotic anterior rectopexy.

Results: Eight studies (3,956 patients) were included in this review. Of those patients, 3,517 patients underwent laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) using synthetic mesh and 439 using biological mesh. Sixty-six erosions were observed with synthetic mesh (26 rectal, 32 vaginal, 8 recto-vaginal fistulae) and one (perineal erosion) with biological mesh. The synthetic and the biological mesh-related erosion rates were 1.87% and 0.22%, respectively. The time between rectopexy and diagnosis of mesh erosion ranged from 1.7 to 124 months. No mesh-related mortalities were reported.

Conclusion: The incidence of mesh-related erosion after LVR is low and is more common after the placement of synthetic mesh. The use of biological mesh for LVR seems to be a safer option; however, large, multicenter, randomized, control trials with long follow-ups are required if a definitive answer is to be obtained.

Citing Articles

Feasibility and safety of biologic OviTex mesh in ventral mesh rectopexy: a prospective pilot study.

Boom M, van der Schans E, Wijffels N, Verheijen P, Consten E Tech Coloproctol. 2025; 29(1):65.

PMID: 39948225 PMC: 11825524. DOI: 10.1007/s10151-024-03097-w.

Mesh-associated complications in minimally invasive ventral mesh rectopexy: a systematic review.

Hess G, Nocera F, Taha-Mehlitz S, Christen S, von Strauss Und Torney M, Steinemann D Surg Endosc. 2024; 38(12):7073-7082.

PMID: 39516323 PMC: 11614941. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-11369-7.

Ventral mesh rectopexy for recurrent rectal prolapse after Altemeier perineal proctosigmoidectomy: feasibility and outcomes.

Schabl L, Hull T, Erozkan K, Alipouriani A, Ban K, Steele S Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2024; 409(1):49.

PMID: 38305915 PMC: 10837248. DOI: 10.1007/s00423-024-03227-w.

The international variability of surgery for rectal prolapse.

Kelley J, Hagen E, Gurland B, Stevenson A, Ogilvie Jr J BMJ Surg Interv Health Technol. 2023; 5(1):e000198.

PMID: 38020494 PMC: 10649678. DOI: 10.1136/bmjsit-2023-000198.

Moving from Laparoscopic Synthetic Mesh to Robotic Biological Mesh for Ventral Rectopexy: Results from a Case Series.

Drissi F, Rogier-Mouzelas F, Fernandez Arias S, Podevin J, Meurette G J Clin Med. 2023; 12(17).

PMID: 37685818 PMC: 10488879. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12175751.

References

Lezoche E, Paganini A, Fabiani B, Balla A, Vestri A, Pescatori L . Quality-of-life impairment after endoluminal locoregional resection and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision. Surg Endosc. 2013; 28(1):227-34. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-013-3166-2. View

Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J . Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg. 2003; 73(9):712-6. DOI: 10.1046/j.1445-2197.2003.02748.x. View

DAmbrosio G, Paganini A, Balla A, Quaresima S, Ursi P, Bruzzone P . Quality of life in non-early rectal cancer treated by neoadjuvant radio-chemotherapy and endoluminal loco-regional resection (ELRR) by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision. Surg Endosc. 2015; 30(2):504-511. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-015-4232-8. View

DHoore A, Cadoni R, Penninckx F . Long-term outcome of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for total rectal prolapse. Br J Surg. 2004; 91(11):1500-5. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.4779. View

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D . Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg. 2010; 8(5):336-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007. View

Loygue J, Nordlinger B, Cunci O, Malafosse M, Huguet C, Parc R . Rectopexy to the promontory for the treatment of rectal prolapse. Report of 257 cases. Dis Colon Rectum. 1984; 27(6):356-9. DOI: 10.1007/BF02552998. View

Jones O, Cunningham C, Lindsey I . The assessment and management of rectal prolapse, rectal intussusception, rectocoele, and enterocoele in adults. BMJ. 2011; 342:c7099. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c7099. View

Wong M, Meurette G, Abet E, Podevin J, Lehur P . Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for complex rectocele. Colorectal Dis. 2010; 13(9):1019-23. DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2010.02349.x. View

Brown R, Ellis C . The role of synthetic and biologic materials in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2014; 27(4):182-90. PMC: 4226752. DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1394157. View

10.

Randall J, Smyth E, McCarthy K, Dixon A . Outcome of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for external rectal prolapse. Colorectal Dis. 2014; 16(11):914-9. DOI: 10.1111/codi.12741. View

11.

Adeyemo D . Mesh fistulation into the rectum after laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2014; 5(3):152-4. PMC: 3955238. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2013.12.012. View

12.

Faucheron J, Voirin D, Riboud R, Waroquet P, Noel J . Laparoscopic anterior rectopexy to the promontory for full-thickness rectal prolapse in 175 consecutive patients: short- and long-term follow-up. Dis Colon Rectum. 2012; 55(6):660-5. DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e318251612e. View

13.

Tranchart H, Valverde A, Goasguen N, Gravie J, Mosnier H . Conservative treatment of intrarectal mesh migration after ventral laparoscopic rectopexy for rectal prolapse. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2013; 28(11):1563-6. DOI: 10.1007/s00384-013-1740-7. View

14.

Samaranayake C, Luo C, Plank A, Merrie A, Plank L, Bissett I . Systematic review on ventral rectopexy for rectal prolapse and intussusception. Colorectal Dis. 2009; 12(6):504-12. DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2009.01934.x. View

15.

DAmbrosio G, Balla A, Mattei F, Quaresima S, De Laurentis F, Paganini A . Quality of Life after Endoluminal Loco-Regional Resection (ELRR) by Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM). Ann Ital Chir. 2015; 86(1):56-60. View

16.

Camilleri-Brennan J, Steele R . Objective assessment of morbidity and quality of life after surgery for low rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2003; 4(1):61-66. DOI: 10.1046/j.1463-1318.2002.00300.x. View

17.

Tou S, Brown S, Malik A, Nelson R . Surgery for complete rectal prolapse in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008; (4):CD001758. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001758.pub2. View

18.

Gouvas N, Georgiou P, Agalianos C, Tan E, Tekkis P, Dervenis C . Ventral colporectopexy for overt rectal prolapse and obstructed defaecation syndrome: a systematic review. Colorectal Dis. 2014; 17(2):O34-46. DOI: 10.1111/codi.12751. View

19.

Ahmad M, Sileri P, Franceschilli L, Mercer-Jones M . The role of biologics in pelvic floor surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2012; 14 Suppl 3:19-23. DOI: 10.1111/codi.12045. View

20.

Gosselink M, Adusumilli S, Gorissen K, Fourie S, Tuynman J, Jones O . Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for fecal incontinence associated with high-grade internal rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013; 56(12):1409-14. DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e3182a85aa6. View