Efficacy and Patient Satisfaction of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Reduction Using Transvaginal Mesh: A Canadian Perspective

Overview

Journal Can Urol Assoc J

Specialty Urology

Date 2018 Jul 11

PMID 29989915

Citations 3

Authors

Melanie Aube

Marilyne Guerin

Caroline Rheaume

Le Mai Tu

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Due to U.S Food and Drud Administration warnings and class-action lawsuits, the use of transvaginal mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery is controversial. We report data from two Canadian centres, focusing on recurrence and reoperation rates, complication rates, and patient satisfaction.

Methods: A retrospective medical chart review was performed. Patients were also invited to a long-term followup clinic for a complete questionnaire and gynecological exam. Patients unable to present to clinic for followup had the option to answer the questionnaire via telephone.

Results: A total of 334 patients were operated between 2000 and 2013. Median followup was 38 months for questionnaire and 36 months for physical exam. Thirty-seven patients (11.1%) required repeat operation, including 17 for recurrent prolapse and 10 for mesh exposure; 98.8% of patients reported feeling subjectively improved by their prolapse surgery.

Conclusions: Midterm results are satisfactory and patient subjective satisfaction is high following transvaginal mesh repair of pelvic organ prolapse.

Citing Articles

Effect of human umbilical cord stem cells (HUMSC) administration on collagen expression in the anterior vaginal wall in menopausal rats.

Marta K, Yasa I, Kusuma A, Astawa I Turk J Obstet Gynecol. 2024; 21(2):85-90.

PMID: 38853483 PMC: 11589231. DOI: 10.4274/tjod.galenos.2024.01613.

Favorable Postoperative Outcomes After Transvaginal Mesh Surgery Using a Wide-Arm ORIHIME® Mesh.

Kuroda K, Hamamoto K, Kawamura K, Masunaga A, Kobayashi H, Horiguchi A Cureus. 2024; 16(2):e53388.

PMID: 38435168 PMC: 10908251. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.53388.

Current surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse: Strategies for the improvement of surgical outcomes.

Ko K, Lee K Investig Clin Urol. 2019; 60(6):413-424.

PMID: 31692921 PMC: 6821990. DOI: 10.4111/icu.2019.60.6.413.

References

de Tayrac R, Brouziyne M, Priou G, Devoldere G, Marie G, Renaudie J . Transvaginal repair of stage III-IV cystocele using a lightweight mesh: safety and 36-month outcome. Int Urogynecol J. 2015; 26(8):1147-54. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-015-2659-z. View

Bjelic-Radisic V, Aigmueller T, Preyer O, Ralph G, Geiss I, Muller G . Vaginal prolapse surgery with transvaginal mesh: results of the Austrian registry. Int Urogynecol J. 2014; 25(8):1047-52. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-014-2333-x. View

Olsen A, Smith V, Bergstrom J, Colling J, Clark A . Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 89(4):501-6. DOI: 10.1016/S0029-7844(97)00058-6. View

Sun Z, Zhu L, Xu T, Shi X, Lang J . Effects of preoperative vaginal estrogen therapy for the incidence of mesh complication after pelvic organ prolapse surgery in postmenopausal women: is it helpful or a myth? A 1-year randomized controlled trial. Menopause. 2016; 23(7):740-8. DOI: 10.1097/GME.0000000000000614. View

Ow L, Lim Y, Dwyer P, Karmakar D, Murray C, Thomas E . Native tissue repair or transvaginal mesh for recurrent vaginal prolapse: what are the long-term outcomes?. Int Urogynecol J. 2016; 27(9):1313-20. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-016-3069-6. View

Parekh M, Swift S, Lemos N, Iskander M, Freeman B, Arunkalaivanan A . Multicenter inter-examiner agreement trial for the validation of simplified POPQ system. Int Urogynecol J. 2011; 22(6):645-50. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-011-1395-2. View

Handa V, Cundiff G, Chang H, Helzlsouer K . Female sexual function and pelvic floor disorders. Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 111(5):1045-52. PMC: 2746737. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31816bbe85. View

Swift S, Morris S, McKinnie V, Freeman R, Petri E, Scotti R . Validation of a simplified technique for using the POPQ pelvic organ prolapse classification system. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2006; 17(6):615-20. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-006-0076-z. View

Schimpf M, Abed H, Sanses T, White A, Lowenstein L, Ward R . Graft and Mesh Use in Transvaginal Prolapse Repair: A Systematic Review. Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 128(1):81-91. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001451. View

10.

Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Christmann-Schmid C, Haya N, Marjoribanks J . Transvaginal mesh or grafts compared with native tissue repair for vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016; 2:CD012079. PMC: 6489145. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012079. View

11.

Gupta P, Payne J, Killinger K, Ehlert M, Bartley J, Gilleran J . Analysis of changes in sexual function in women undergoing pelvic organ prolapse repair with abdominal or vaginal approaches. Int Urogynecol J. 2016; 27(12):1919-1924. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-016-3066-9. View

12.

Santoro N, Epperson C, Mathews S . Menopausal Symptoms and Their Management. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 2015; 44(3):497-515. PMC: 4890704. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecl.2015.05.001. View

13.

Balchandra P, Marsh F, Landon C . Perioperative outcomes and prospective patient reported outcome measures for transvaginal mesh surgery. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015; 292(4):875-82. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-015-3724-z. View

14.

Srikrishna S, Robinson D, Cardozo L . Validation of the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) for urogenital prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2009; 21(5):523-8. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-009-1069-5. View

15.

Kelly E, Winick-Ng J, Welk B . Surgeon Experience and Complications of Transvaginal Prolapse Mesh. Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 128(1):65-72. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001450. View

16.

Heinonen P, Aaltonen R, Joronen K, Ala-Nissila S . Long-term outcome after transvaginal mesh repair of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2016; 27(7):1069-74. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-015-2939-7. View