Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal 6/2014

01-06-2014 | Original Article

Outcomes following treatment for pelvic floor mesh complications

Authors: C. A. Unger, S. Abbott, J. M. Evans, K. Jallad, K. Mishra, M. M. Karram, C. B. Iglesia, C. R. Rardin, M. D. Barber

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 6/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Our aim was to determine symptoms and degree of improvement in a cohort of women who presented following treatment for vaginal mesh complications.

Methods

This study was a follow-up to a multicenter, retrospective study of women who presented to four tertiary referral centers for management of vaginal-mesh-related complications. Study participants completed a one-time follow-up survey regarding any additional treatment, current symptoms, and degree of improvement from initial presentation.

Results

Two hundred and sixty women received surveys; we had a response rate of 41.1 % (107/260). Complete data were available for 101 respondents. Survey respondents were more likely to be postmenopausal (p = 0.006), but otherwise did not differ from nonrespondents. Fifty-one percent (52/101) of women underwent surgery as the primary intervention for their mesh complication; 8 % (4/52) underwent a second surgery; 34 % (17/52) required a second nonsurgical intervention. Three patients required three or more surgeries. Of the 30 % (30/101) of respondents who reported pelvic pain prior to intervention, 63 % (19/30) reported improvement, 30 % (9/30) were worse, and 7 % (2/30) reported no change. Of the 33 % (33/101) who reported voiding dysfunction prior to intervention, 61 % (20/33) reported being at least somewhat bothered by these symptoms.

Conclusions

About 50 % of women with mesh complications in this study underwent surgical management as treatment, and <10 % required a second surgery. Most patients with pain preintervention reported significant improvement after treatment; however, almost a third reported worsening pain or no change after surgical management. Less than half of patients with voiding dysfunction improved after intervention.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Wu JM, Kawasaki A, Hundley AF, Dieter AA, Myers ER, Sung VW (2011) Predicting the number of women who will undergo incontinence and prolapse surgery, 2010 to 2050. Am J Obstet Gynecol 205(3):230–231PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Wu JM, Kawasaki A, Hundley AF, Dieter AA, Myers ER, Sung VW (2011) Predicting the number of women who will undergo incontinence and prolapse surgery, 2010 to 2050. Am J Obstet Gynecol 205(3):230–231PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Mistrangelo E, Mancuso S, Nadalini C et al (2007) Rising use of synthetic mesh in transvaginal pelvic reconstructive surgery: a review of the risk of vaginal erosion. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 14:564–569PubMedCrossRef Mistrangelo E, Mancuso S, Nadalini C et al (2007) Rising use of synthetic mesh in transvaginal pelvic reconstructive surgery: a review of the risk of vaginal erosion. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 14:564–569PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Hiltunen R, Nieminen K, Takala T et al (2007) Low-weight polypropylene mesh for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 110(2 Pt 2):455–462PubMedCrossRef Hiltunen R, Nieminen K, Takala T et al (2007) Low-weight polypropylene mesh for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 110(2 Pt 2):455–462PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Nguyen JN, Burchette RJ (2008) Outcome after anterior vaginal prolapse repair: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 111:891–898PubMedCrossRef Nguyen JN, Burchette RJ (2008) Outcome after anterior vaginal prolapse repair: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 111:891–898PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Diwadkar GB, Barber MD, Feiner B et al (2009) Complication and reoperation rates after apical vaginal prolapse surgical repair. Obstet Gynecol 113:367–373PubMedCrossRef Diwadkar GB, Barber MD, Feiner B et al (2009) Complication and reoperation rates after apical vaginal prolapse surgical repair. Obstet Gynecol 113:367–373PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Ridgeway B, Walters MD, Paraiso M et al (2008) Early experience with mesh excision for adverse outcomes after transvaginal mesh placement using prolapse kits. Am J Obstet Gynecol 199:703.e1–703.e7CrossRef Ridgeway B, Walters MD, Paraiso M et al (2008) Early experience with mesh excision for adverse outcomes after transvaginal mesh placement using prolapse kits. Am J Obstet Gynecol 199:703.e1–703.e7CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Abbott S, Evans JM, Jallad K, Mishra K, Unger CA, Karram MM, Iglesia CB, Rardin CR, Barber MD (2012) Evaluation and management of complications from synthetic mesh after pelvic reconstructive surgery: a multi-center study. FPMRS 18(5S1):14. [In press - Am J Obstet Gynecol] Abbott S, Evans JM, Jallad K, Mishra K, Unger CA, Karram MM, Iglesia CB, Rardin CR, Barber MD (2012) Evaluation and management of complications from synthetic mesh after pelvic reconstructive surgery: a multi-center study. FPMRS 18(5S1):14. [In press - Am J Obstet Gynecol]
10.
go back to reference Al-Nazer MA, Ismail WA, Gomaa IA (2007) Comparative study between anterior colporraphy versus vaginal wall repair with mesh for management of anterior vaginal wall prolapse (Abstract number 84). Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18(Suppl 1):49–50 Al-Nazer MA, Ismail WA, Gomaa IA (2007) Comparative study between anterior colporraphy versus vaginal wall repair with mesh for management of anterior vaginal wall prolapse (Abstract number 84). Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18(Suppl 1):49–50
11.
go back to reference Carey M, Higgs P, Goh J, Lim J, Leong A, Krause H, Cornish A (2009) Vaginal repair with mesh versus colporrhaphy for prolapse: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG 116(10):1380–1386PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Carey M, Higgs P, Goh J, Lim J, Leong A, Krause H, Cornish A (2009) Vaginal repair with mesh versus colporrhaphy for prolapse: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG 116(10):1380–1386PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Sivaslioglu AA, Unlubilgin E, Dolen I (2008) A randomized comparison of polypropylene mesh surgery with site-specific surgery in the treatment of cystocoele. Int Urogynecol J 19(4):467–471CrossRef Sivaslioglu AA, Unlubilgin E, Dolen I (2008) A randomized comparison of polypropylene mesh surgery with site-specific surgery in the treatment of cystocoele. Int Urogynecol J 19(4):467–471CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Nieminen K, Hiltunen R, Heiskanen E, Takala T, Niemi K, Merikari M et al (2008) Symptom resolution and sexual function after anterior vaginal wall repair with or without polypropylene mesh. Int Urogynecol J 19(12):1611–1616CrossRef Nieminen K, Hiltunen R, Heiskanen E, Takala T, Niemi K, Merikari M et al (2008) Symptom resolution and sexual function after anterior vaginal wall repair with or without polypropylene mesh. Int Urogynecol J 19(12):1611–1616CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Menefee SA, Dyer KY, Lukacz ES, Simsiman AJ, Luber KM, Nguyen JN (2011) Colporrhaphy compared with mesh or graft-reinforced vaginal paravaginal repair for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 118(6):1337–1344PubMedCrossRef Menefee SA, Dyer KY, Lukacz ES, Simsiman AJ, Luber KM, Nguyen JN (2011) Colporrhaphy compared with mesh or graft-reinforced vaginal paravaginal repair for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 118(6):1337–1344PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Feiner B, Maher C (2010) Vaginal mesh contraction: definition, clinical management. Obstet Gynecol 115(2 Pt 1):325–330PubMedCrossRef Feiner B, Maher C (2010) Vaginal mesh contraction: definition, clinical management. Obstet Gynecol 115(2 Pt 1):325–330PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Outcomes following treatment for pelvic floor mesh complications
Authors
C. A. Unger
S. Abbott
J. M. Evans
K. Jallad
K. Mishra
M. M. Karram
C. B. Iglesia
C. R. Rardin
M. D. Barber
Publication date
01-06-2014
Publisher
Springer London
Published in
International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 6/2014
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2282-9

Other articles of this Issue 6/2014

International Urogynecology Journal 6/2014 Go to the issue