Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal 7/2017

01-07-2017 | Original Article

Mesh removal after vaginal surgery: what happens in the UK?

Authors: Jonathan Duckett, Roland Morley, Ash Monga, Tim Hillard, Dudley Robinson

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 7/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

There is little objective evidence regarding complication rates for mesh procedures outside clinical trials. Current coding poorly collects complications of prolapse and continence surgery using mesh. This survey was designed to identify surgeons performing mesh removal and reporting patterns in the UK.

Methods

An electronic questionnaire was sent to all members of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and members of the Section of Female Neurological and Urodynamic Urology of the British Association of Urologists in the UK. The questionnaire aimed to identify the number of procedures performed for mesh complications and whether they were reported to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and the patterns of referral and treatment

Results

Referral to a colleague in the same hospital was common practice (69 %). Only 27 % of respondents stated that they reported all removals to the MHRA. The numbers of surgical procedures were low, with most respondents performing between one and three procedures each year and many not performing any surgery for a specific mesh complication in the previous year.

Conclusions

Removal of exposed, eroded and/or painful vaginally inserted mesh is performed by many different surgeons in a variety of hospital settings in the UK.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Jelovesk J, Barber M. Women seeking treatment for advanced pelvic organ prolapse have decreased body image and quality of life. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194:1455–1461.CrossRef Jelovesk J, Barber M. Women seeking treatment for advanced pelvic organ prolapse have decreased body image and quality of life. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194:1455–1461.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Novara G, Artibani W, Barber M, et al. Updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the comparative data on colposuspensions, pubovaginal slings and midurethral tapes in the surgical treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. Eur Urol. 2010;58:218–238.CrossRefPubMed Novara G, Artibani W, Barber M, et al. Updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the comparative data on colposuspensions, pubovaginal slings and midurethral tapes in the surgical treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. Eur Urol. 2010;58:218–238.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference US Food and Drug Administration. Safety Communications. Update on serious complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. Spring Harbor, MD: Food and Drug Administration; 2011. US Food and Drug Administration. Safety Communications. Update on serious complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. Spring Harbor, MD: Food and Drug Administration; 2011.
5.
go back to reference Ulmsten U, Petros P. Intravaginal slingplasty (IVS): an ambulatory surgical procedure for treatment of female urinary incontinence. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1995;29:75–82.CrossRefPubMed Ulmsten U, Petros P. Intravaginal slingplasty (IVS): an ambulatory surgical procedure for treatment of female urinary incontinence. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1995;29:75–82.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. A summary of the evidence on the benefits and risks of vaginal mesh implants. London: Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency; 2014. Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. A summary of the evidence on the benefits and risks of vaginal mesh implants. London: Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency; 2014.
9.
go back to reference Chief Medical Officer and Public Health Directorate. Transvaginal mesh implants (letter from the Acting Chief Medical Officer, A. Keel). Edinburgh: The Scottish Government; 2014. Chief Medical Officer and Public Health Directorate. Transvaginal mesh implants (letter from the Acting Chief Medical Officer, A. Keel). Edinburgh: The Scottish Government; 2014.
10.
go back to reference Chughtai B, Mao J, Buck J, Kaplan S, Sedrakyan A. Use and risks of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery in women in New York state: population based cohort study. BMJ. 2015;350:h2685.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Chughtai B, Mao J, Buck J, Kaplan S, Sedrakyan A. Use and risks of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery in women in New York state: population based cohort study. BMJ. 2015;350:h2685.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Urinary incontinence in women: management. CG171. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2013. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Urinary incontinence in women: management. CG171. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2013.
Metadata
Title
Mesh removal after vaginal surgery: what happens in the UK?
Authors
Jonathan Duckett
Roland Morley
Ash Monga
Tim Hillard
Dudley Robinson
Publication date
01-07-2017
Publisher
Springer London
Published in
International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 7/2017
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3217-z

Other articles of this Issue 7/2017

International Urogynecology Journal 7/2017 Go to the issue