scholarly journals Comparative Retrospective Study of Tension-Free Vaginal Mesh Surgery, Native Tissue Repair, and Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Haruhiko Kanasaki ◽  
Aki Oride ◽  
Tomomi Hara ◽  
Satoru Kyo
Keyword(s):  
Pelvic Organ Prolapse ◽  
Recurrence Rate ◽  
Tissue Repair ◽  
Pelvic Organ ◽  
Mesh Erosion ◽  
Vaginal Mesh ◽  
Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy ◽  
Native Tissue Repair ◽  
Tension Free ◽  
Significant Difference

Introduction and Hypothesis. Many would argue that sacrocolpopexy is the standard surgical procedure for pelvic organ prolapse (POP), but other surgical techniques were proposed and practically applying to the patients with POP. In this study, we compared postoperative outcomes of three surgical methods for POP repair. Methods. We identified that 308 women who had undergone surgical repair of POP were followed up for at least 6 months. Recurrence rates of POP after tension-free vaginal mesh (TVM) surgery (n = 243), native tissue repair (NTR) (vaginal hysterectomy with colpopexy, anterior and posterior colpoplasty, or circumferential suturing of the levator ani muscles and apical repair by transvaginal sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF)) (NTR; n = 31), and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy after subtotal hysterectomy (LSC; n = 34) were compared. Presence of mesh erosion was also recorded. Results. Patients who underwent LSC were significantly younger (65.32 ± 3.23 years) than those who underwent TVM surgery (69.61 ± 8.31 years). After TVM surgery, the rate of recurrence (over POP-Q stage II) was 6.17% (15/243) and was highest in patients with advanced POP. The recurrence rate in patients who underwent NTR procedure was 3.23% (1/34) and that in patients who underwent LSC was 11.76% (4/11). There was no statistically significant difference in the recurrence rate between the three types of surgery. There were 13 cases (5.35%) of mesh erosion after TVM surgery and none after LSC surgery. The risk of mesh erosion was correlated with having had total TVM surgery but not with patient age or POP stage. Repeat procedures were performed in 5 women (2.14%) who underwent TVM surgery and 1 (2.94%) who underwent LSC. No patient underwent repeat surgery after NTR. There was no statistically significant difference in the reoperation rate between the three types of surgery. Conclusion. Our study suggested that TVM surgery, NTR, and LSC have comparable outcomes as for the postoperative recurrence rate and mesh erosion. However, the outcomes of each technique need to be carefully evaluated over a long period of time.

scholarly journals Current situation of complications related to reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse: a multicenter study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhi-jing Sun ◽  
Tao Guo ◽  
Xiu-qi Wang ◽  
Jing-he Lang ◽  
Tao Xu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Pelvic Organ Prolapse ◽  
Pelvic Floor ◽  
Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
Tissue Repair ◽  
Pelvic Organ ◽  
Native Tissue Repair ◽  
Post Surgery ◽  
Management Of Complications ◽  
Surgery Delay

Abstract Introduction and hypothesis This study aimed to investigate the evaluation and management of complications after pelvic floor reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse in China. Methods Complications of pelvic floor reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapses from 27 institutions were reported from November 2017 to October 2019. All complications were coded according to the category-time-site system proposed by the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) and the International Continence Society (ICS). The severity of the complications was graded by the Clavien-Dindo grading system. Four scales were used to evaluate patient satisfaction and quality of life after management of the complications: the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire Short Form (PFIQ-7), the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score (POP-SS), and a 5-point Likert-type scale that evaluated the patient’s choice of surgery. Results Totally, 256 cases were reported. The occurrence of complications related to transvaginal mesh (TVM) and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) had a significantly longer post-surgery delay than those of native tissue repair surgery (p < 0.001 and p = 0.010, respectively). Both PFIQ-7 and POP-SS score were lower after management of complications (p < 0.001). Most respondents (81.67%) selected very much better, much better, or a little better on the PGI-I scale. Only 13.3% respondents selected unlikely or highly unlikely on the 5-point Likert-type scale. Conclusions The occurrence of complications related to TVM surgery and LSC had a longer post-surgery delay than native tissue repair surgery. Long-term regular follow-up was vital in complication management. Patient satisfaction with the management of TVM complications was acceptable.

Tension-free vaginal mesh procedure for pelvic organ prolapse: A single-center experience of 310 cases with 1-year follow up

2010 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 353-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satoru Takahashi ◽  
Daisuke Obinata ◽  
Takahiro Sakuma ◽  
Yusuke Nagane ◽  
Katsuhiko Sato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pelvic Organ Prolapse ◽  
Pelvic Organ ◽  
Vaginal Mesh ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Tension Free ◽  
Single Center Experience

scholarly journals Long-term follow-up after native tissue repair for pelvic organ prolapse

2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sissel H. Oversand ◽  
Anne Cathrine Staff ◽  
Anny E. Spydslaug ◽  
Rune Svenningsen ◽  
Ellen Borstad
Keyword(s):  
Pelvic Organ Prolapse ◽  
Tissue Repair ◽  
Pelvic Organ ◽  
Native Tissue Repair ◽  
Native Tissue ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

scholarly journals Risk factors and management of vaginal mesh erosion after pelvic organ prolapse surgery

2017 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 184-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yung-Wen Cheng ◽  
Tsung-Hsien Su ◽  
Hsuan Wang ◽  
Wen-Chu Huang ◽  
Hui-Hsuan Lau
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Pelvic Organ Prolapse ◽  
Pelvic Organ ◽  
Mesh Erosion ◽  
Vaginal Mesh ◽  
Prolapse Surgery ◽  
Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document