Transvaginal mesh removal with native-tissue repair for mesh shrinkage and recurrent uterovaginal prolapse following vaginal mesh-augmented surgery

2017 ◽  
Vol 139 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodolfo Milani ◽  
Matteo Frigerio ◽  
Stefania Palmieri ◽  
Stefano Manodoro
Keyword(s):  
Tissue Repair ◽  
Vaginal Mesh ◽  
Transvaginal Mesh ◽  
Uterovaginal Prolapse ◽  
Native Tissue Repair ◽  
Mesh Removal ◽  
Native Tissue ◽  
Mesh Shrinkage

scholarly journals Transvaginal mesh or grafts compared with native tissue repair for vaginal prolapse

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Maher ◽  
Benjamin Feiner ◽  
Kaven Baessler ◽  
Corina Christmann-Schmid ◽  
Nir Haya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tissue Repair ◽  
Vaginal Prolapse ◽  
Transvaginal Mesh ◽  
Native Tissue Repair ◽  
Native Tissue

Native tissue repair or transvaginal mesh for recurrent vaginal prolapse: what are the long-term outcomes?

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (9) ◽  
pp. 1313-1320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lin Li Ow ◽  
Yik N. Lim ◽  
Peter L. Dwyer ◽  
Debjyoti Karmakar ◽  
Christine Murray ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tissue Repair ◽  
Vaginal Prolapse ◽  
Transvaginal Mesh ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Native Tissue Repair ◽  
Native Tissue

scholarly journals Long-term outcomes of vaginal mesh versus native tissue repair for anterior vaginal wall prolapse

2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (8) ◽  
pp. 1279-1285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Jonsson Funk ◽  
Anthony G. Visco ◽  
Alison C. Weidner ◽  
Virginia Pate ◽  
Jennifer M. Wu
Keyword(s):  
Tissue Repair ◽  
Vaginal Wall ◽  
Anterior Vaginal Wall ◽  
Vaginal Mesh ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Anterior Vaginal Wall Prolapse ◽  
Native Tissue Repair ◽  
Native Tissue

scholarly journals Comparison of treatment outcomes for native tissue repair and sacrocolpopexy as apical suspension procedures at the time of hysterectomy for uterine prolapse

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sumin Oh ◽  
E. Kyung Shin ◽  
Sowoon Hyun ◽  
Myung Jae Jeon
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Outcomes ◽  
Tissue Repair ◽  
Uterine Prolapse ◽  
Reoperation Rate ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Native Tissue Repair ◽  
Apical Suspension ◽  
Native Tissue ◽  
Surgical Failure

AbstractConcomitant apical suspension should be performed at the time of hysterectomy for uterine prolapse to reduce the risk of recurrent prolapse. Native tissue repair (NTR) and sacrocolpopexy (SCP) are commonly used apical suspension procedures; however, it remains unclear which one is preferred. This study aimed to compare the treatment outcomes of NTR and SCP in terms of surgical failure, complication and reoperation rates. Surgical failure was defined as the presence of vaginal bulge symptoms, any prolapse beyond the hymen, or retreatment for prolapse. This retrospective cohort study included 523 patients who had undergone NTR (n = 272) or SCP (n = 251) along with hysterectomy for uterine prolapse and who had at least 4-month follow-up visits. During the median 3-year follow-up period, the surgical failure rate was higher in the NTR group (21.3% vs 6.4%, P < 0.01), with a low rate of retreatment in both groups. Overall complication rates were similar, but complications requiring surgical correction under anesthesia were more common in the SCP group (7.2% vs 0.4%, P < 0.01). As a result, the total reoperation rate was significantly higher in the SCP group (8.0% vs 2.6%, P = 0.02). Taken together, NTR may be a preferred option for apical suspension when hysterectomy is performed for uterine prolapse.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document