Postoperative outcomes and urodynamic findings after continence mesh removal.
continence
mesh
mesh complications
mesh removal
Journal
International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics
ISSN: 1879-3479
Titre abrégé: Int J Gynaecol Obstet
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0210174
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Aug 2023
12 Aug 2023
Historique:
revised:
26
07
2023
received:
21
03
2023
accepted:
29
07
2023
medline:
12
8
2023
pubmed:
12
8
2023
entrez:
12
8
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
To analyze urodynamics findings and patient-reported outcomes after removal of a mid-urethral mesh because data regarding outcomes following mesh removal vary in different studies, and mesh removal itself may have risks. Women who were referred to the Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery Department of University College London Hospital and underwent vaginal removal of a continence mesh between January 2014 and January 2020, were included. Patient clinical data and results of video-urodynamics investigations performed 4 months after mesh removal were collected and analyzed retrospectively. In all, 204 patients were included in the study. After mesh removal, 80.5% of patients reported recurrent stress urinary incontinence (SUI), 10.1% reported prolapse symptoms, 8% reported voiding dysfunction and 2.9% reported overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms. Video-urodynamics investigations confirmed the presence of SUI (67.6%), mixed urinary incontinence (14.3%), detrusor overactivity (DO) (6.8%) and voiding dysfunction in one patient. In two women a urethral stricture was described, and 10 women were deemed to have a significant cystocele. Recurrence of SUI was the most frequent finding after continence mesh removal, both symptomatically and objectively. Women seldom reported OAB symptoms, but urodynamics showed evidence of DO despite this. On the other hand, voiding dysfunction was often reported but less often proven on urodynamics.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2023 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.
Références
Jonsson Funk M, Edenfield AL, Pate V, Visco AG, Weidner AC, Wu JM. Trends in use of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;208(1):79.e1-79.e7.
Rizvi RM, Chughtai NG. Graft and mesh use in vaginal surgery. J Pak Med Assoc. 2017;67(12):1895-1900.
Cumberlege J. First Do No Harm - The report of the Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Review. Crown Copyright; 2020.
Nilsson CG, Palva K, Aarnio R, Morcos E, Falconer C. Seventeen years' follow-up of the tension-free vaginal tape procedure for female stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(8):1265-1269.
Keltie K, Elneil S, Monga A, et al. Complications following vaginal mesh procedures for stress urinary incontinence: an 8 year study of 92,246 women. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):12015.
Chughtai B, Barber MD, Mao J, Forde JC, Normand SLT, Sedrakyan A. Association between the amount of vaginal mesh used with mesh erosions and repeated surgery after repairing pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(3):257-263.
Lee D, Zimmern PE. An update on research and outcomes in surgical management of vaginal mesh complications. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2019;16(7):569-580.
Lee D, Dillon B, Lemack G, Gomelsky A, Zimmern P. Transvaginal mesh kits-how “serious” are the complications and are they reversible? Urology. 2013;81(1):43-48.
Karmakar D, Hayward L. What can we learn from the vaginal mesh story? Climacteric. 2019;22(3):277-282.
Haylen BT, Freeman RT, Swift SE, et al. An International Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint terminology and classification of the complications related directly to the insertion of prostheses (mesh, implants, tapes) & grafts in female pelvic floor surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;30(1):2-12.
Hou JC, Alhalabi F, Lemack GE, Zimmern PE. Outcome of transvaginal mesh and tape removed for pain only. J Urol. 2014;192(3):856-860.
Ordorica R, Rodriguez AR, Coste-Delvecchio F, Hoffman M, Lockhart J. Disabling complications with slings for managing female stress urinary incontinence. BJU Int. 2008;102(3):333-336.
Schafer W, Abrams P, Liao L, et al. Good urodynamic practices: uroflowmetry, filling cystometry, and pressure-flow studies. NeurourolUrodyn. 2002;21(3):261-274.
Kokanali MK, Doğanay M, Aksakal O, Cavkaytar S, Topçu HO, Özer İ. Risk factors for mesh erosion after vaginal mesh procedures for urinary incontinence. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;177:146-150.
Dumoulin C, Pazzoto Cacciari L, Mercier J. Keeping the pelvic floor healthy. Climacteric. 2019;22(3):257-262.
Mitchell CM, Waetjen LE. Genitourinary changes with aging. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2018;45(4):737-750.
Fuselier A, Hanberry J, Margaret Lovin J, Gomelsky A. Obesity and stress urinary incontinence: impact on pathophysiology and treatment. Curr Urol Rep. 2018;19(1):10.
Marcelissen T, Van Kerrebroeck P. Overactive bladder symptoms after midurethral mesh surgery in women: risk factors and management. NeurourolUrodyn. 2018;37(1):83-88.