Medium-term clinical outcomes following surgical repair for vaginal prolapse with tension-free mesh and vaginal support device

International Urogynecology Consultation Chapter 1 Committee 5: relationship of pelvic organ prolapse to associated pelvic floor dysfunction symptoms: lower urinary tract, bowel, sexual dysfunction and abdominopelvic pain

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

This article from Chapter 1 of the International Urogynecology Consultation (IUC) on Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) establishes the prevalence of lower urinary tract disorders, bowel symptoms, vulvo-vaginal/lower abdominal/back pain and sexual dysfunction in women with POP.

METHODS

An international group of nine urogynecologists/urologists and one medical student performed a search of the literature using pre-specified search terms in Ovid, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL from January 2000 to March 2019. Publications were eliminated if not relevant or they did not include clear definitions of POP or the symptoms associated with POP. Definitions of POP needed to include both a physical examination finding using a validated examination technique and the complaint of a bothersome vaginal bulge. Symptoms were categorized into symptom groups for ease of evaluation. The Specialist Unit for Review Evidence (SURE) was used to evaluate for quality of the included articles. The resulting list of articles was used to determine the prevalence of various symptoms in women with POP. Cohort studies were used to evaluate for possible causation of POP as either causing or worsening the symptom category.

RESULTS

The original search yielded over 12,000 references, of which 50 were used. More than 50% of women with POP report lower urinary tract symptoms. Cohort studies suggest that women with POP have more obstructive lower urinary tract symptoms than women without POP. Pain described in various ways is frequently reported in women with POP, with low back pain being the most common pain symptom reported in 45% of women with POP. In cohort studies those with POP had more pain complaints than those without POP. Sexual dysfunction is reported by over half of women with POP and obstructed intercourse in 37-100% of women with POP. Approximately 40% of women have complaints of bowel symptoms. There was no difference in the median prevalence of bowel symptoms in those with and without POP in cohort studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of lower urinary tract disorders, bowel symptoms, vulvo-vaginal/lower abdominal/back pain and sexual dysfunction in women with POP are common but inconsistently reported. There are few data on incidence of associated symptoms with POP, and cohort studies evaluating causality are rare or inconsistent. Obstructive voiding, lower abdominal and pelvic pain, and sexual dysfunction are most frequently associated with POP.

No. 351-Transvaginal Mesh Procedures for Pelvic Organ Prolapse

OBJECTIVE

This guideline reviews the evidence related to the risks and benefits of using transvaginal mesh in pelvic organ prolapse repairs in order to update recommendations initially made in 2011.

INTENDED USERS

Gynaecologists, residents, urologists, urogynaecologists, and other health care providers who assess, counsel, and care for women with pelvic organ prolapse.

TARGET POPULATION

Adult women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse considering surgery and those who have previously undergone transvaginal mesh procedures for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.

OPTIONS

The discussion relates to transvaginal mesh procedures compared with other surgical options for pelvic organ prolapse (mainly about vaginal native tissue repairs and minimally about other alternatives such as biological and absorbable vaginal mesh and abdominally placed surgical mesh).

OUTCOMES

The outcomes of interest are objective and subjective success rates and intraoperative and postoperative complications, such as adjacent organ injury (urinary, gastrointestinal), infection, hematoma/bleeding, vaginal mesh exposure, persistent pain, dyspareunia, de novo stress urinary incontinence, and reoperation.

EVIDENCE

PubMed, Medline, the Cochrane Database, and EMBASE were searched using the key words pelvic organ prolapse/surgery*, prolapse/surgery*, surgical mesh, surgical mesh*/adverse effects, transvaginal mesh, and pelvic organ prolapse.

RESULTS

were restricted to English or French language and human research. Articles obtained through this search strategy were included until the end of June 2016. Pertinent new studies were added up to September 2016. Grey literature was not searched. Clinical practice guidelines and guidelines of specialty societies were reviewed. Systematic reviews were included when available. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies were included when evidence for the outcome of interest or in the target population was not available from systematic reviews. New studies not yet included in systematic reviews were also included. Only publications with study groups larger than 20 individuals were selected because this criterion was used in the largest meta-analysis referenced in this guideline. A total of 1470 studies were obtained; after selecting only applicable studies and excluding duplicates, 68 manuscripts were reviewed and included.

VALUES

The content and recommendations were drafted and agreed upon by the principal authors and members of the Urogynaecology Committee. The Board of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada approved the final draft for publication. The quality of evidence was rated using the criteria described in the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology framework. The Summary of Findings is available upon request.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND/OR COSTS

It is expected that this guideline will benefit women with pelvic organ prolapse by ensuring that health care providers are aware of outcomes related to transvaginal mesh procedures and steps in the management of related complications. This should guide patient-informed consent before such procedures are undertaken. The benefits clearly outweigh the potential harms or costs of implementation of this guideline, although no direct harms or costs are identified.

GUIDELINE UPDATE

Evidence will be reviewed 5 years after publication to decide whether all or part of the guideline should be updated. However, if important new evidence is published prior to the 5-year cycle, the review process may be accelerated for a more rapid update of some recommendations.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS.

Sexual activity and quality of life in Japanese pelvic organ prolapse patients after transvaginal mesh surgery

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate sexual activity and quality of life (QOL) after transvaginal mesh (TVM) surgery in Japanese patients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The objective cure rate and associated complications were also investigated.

METHODS

The cases of patients who underwent TVM surgery were retrospectively analyzed. QOL was assessed using the Prolapse Quality of Life Questionnaire (P-QOL), and sexual function was evaluated using the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) before surgery and 12 months after surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 237 patients completed the planned follow-up examinations. All P-QOL domains were significantly improved after surgery. In total, 6 (2.5%), 5 (2.1%), 13 (5.5%), 4 (1.7%) and 1 (0.4%) patients developed recurrent POP, mesh extrusion, de novo stress urinary incontinence, inguinal pain and de novo dyspareunia, respectively. Before surgery, 124 of the 237 patients (52.3%) refused to complete the FSFI because they had not engaged in any sexual activity. Among the 113 patients who completed the FSFI, 13 (11.5%) were sexually active. After surgery, 79 patients completed the FSFI, and 14 (17.7%) were sexually active. The overall scores for sexual function and arousal were significantly improved after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent TVM surgery at our institution exhibited quite low sexual activity levels both before and after the operation. But TVM surgery achieved good QOL outcomes, a high success rate and a low complications rate at 12 months in Japanese POP patients. TVM implantation for POP is safe and effective in sexually inactive patients.

Long term Follow-up of Transvaginal Anatomical Implant of Mesh in Pelvic organ prolapse

Transvaginal mesh (TVM) is a minimally invasive but effective treatment for pelvic organ prolapse (POP). However, mesh exposure is a common and problematic complication after TVM. This study assessed the safety and long-term outcomes of TVM. A retrospective review was performed on the medical records of 175 consecutive patients who underwent TVM with the anatomical implant technique for pelvic organ prolapse at our center from April 2007 to December 2012. All operations were performed using TVM with the anatomical implant technique. Intraoperative variables, postoperative complications, and TVM outcomes were assessed. In average of 8 years (ranging from 4 to 10 years), the objective cure ratio reached 99.4%; and the subjective success rate of the TVM operation was 91.4%. Only 2 cases (1.1%) were identified as having mesh exposure. The reoperation rate was 4.0% (95% CI, 1.1–6.9%). No patients abstained from sex due to the operation or postoperative discomfort. Our anatomical implant technique for correcting POP is feasible in TVM procedures, which lead to favourable subjective and objective outcomes with the lowest rates of mesh exposure (1.1%) in published data. Therefore, performing TVM operations with the appropriate technique could consider to be permitted.

Self-retaining support implant: an anchorless system for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse-2-year follow-up

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

The search for an improved vaginal mesh prompted the development of a new anchorless implant. The objective was to report on outcome after 2 years of a technique using a self-retaining support (SRS) implant.

METHODS

Patients with anterior vaginal wall prolapse, with/without apical prolapse, were recruited. Participants underwent surgical repair using the SRS device. Demographic data, pre-surgical Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) scoring, quality of life (QoL) questionnaires (Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Short Form 20 [PFDI-20], Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire 12 [PISQ-12]), and surgical data were collected. Patients were followed at 2 weeks, 2, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Objective anatomical success was defined using the NIH criteria.

RESULTS

Twenty women were recruited for the study with an average age of 62.1 years and an average parity of 4.0 deliveries. Average BMI was 28. Pre-operative mean POP-Q measurements were Aa =1.40 (-1 to 3) cm, Ba = 2.3 (-1 to 6) cm and C = 0.4 (-7 to 6) cm. Surgical time averaged 31.2 min. Estimated blood loss averaged 165 ml. No intra-operative complications were observed. One case (5%) of frame erosion was documented 8 months after surgery. At 2 years' follow-up, mean POP-Q measurements were: Aa = -2.95 (-3 to -2) cm, Ba = -2.85 (-3 to -2) cm, and C point -6.90 (-10 to -3) cm. Seventeen (85%) patients had stage 0 and 3 patients (15%) had stage 1. No mesh erosions or chronic pelvic pain were documented at follow-up. The total PFDI score at follow-up was decreased by 92.8 points (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

At 2 years' follow-up, the SRS implant was found to be safe, showing no intra-operative or immediate post-operative complications. All women presented with POP-Q measurements of the anterior and apical compartment at normal value (Ba ≤ -2 cm) and statistically significant subjective improvement.

[Treatment of Urinary incontinence associated with genital prolapse: Clinical practrice guidelines]

INTRODUCTION

Prolapse and urinary incontinence are frequently associated. Patente (or proven) stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is defined by a leakage of urine that occurs with coughing or Valsalva, in the absence of any prolapse reduction manipulation. Masked urinary incontinence results in leakage of urine occurring during reduction of prolapse during the clinical examination in a patient who does not describe incontinence symptoms at baseline. The purpose of this chapter is to consider on the issue of systematic support or not of urinary incontinence, patent or hidden, during the cure of pelvic organs prolapse by abdominal or vaginal approach.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This work is based on an systematic review of the literature (PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, EMBASE) for meta-analyzes, randomized trials, registries, literature reviews, controlled studies and major not controlled studies, published on the subject. Its implementation has followed the methodology of the HAS on the recommendations for clinical practice, with a scientific argument (with the level of evidence, NP) and a recommendation grade (A, B, C, and professional agreement).

RESULTS

In case of patent IUE, concomitant treatment of prolapse and SUI reduces the risk of postoperative SUI. However, the isolated treatment of prolapse can treat up to 30% of preoperative SUI. Concomitant treatment of SUI exposed to a specific overactive bladder and dysuria morbidity. The presence of a hidden IUE represents a risk of postoperative SUI, but there is no clinical or urodynamic test to predict individually the risk of postoperative SUI. Moreover, the isolated treatment of prolapse can treat up to 60% of the masked SUI. Concomitant treatment of the hidden IUE therefore exposes again to overtreatment and a specific overactive bladder and dysuria morbidity.

CONCLUSION

In case of overt or hidden urinary incontinence, concomitant treatment of SUI and prolapse reduces the risk of postoperative SUI but exposes to a specific overactive bladder and dysuria morbidity (NP3). The isolated treatment of prolapse often allows itself to treat preoperative SUI. We can suggest not to treat SUI (whether patent or hidden) at the same time, providing that women are informed of the possibility of 2 stages surgery (Grade C). © 2016 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.

Factors that affect outcomes of prolapse repair using single-incision vaginal mesh procedures

AIMS

Single-incision vaginal mesh (SIVM) procedures for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) differed in mesh fabrication and implantation that may affect treatment outcomes. We aim to evaluate and compare the safety and effectiveness of two SIVM procedures, and explore factors that may have associations with surgical effectiveness.

METHODS

Our data of using two SIVM procedures for a total (anterior and posterior) vaginal mesh repair were studied. Patients who had ≧stage 2 POP and underwent either Elevate (n = 85) using anchored, lightweight meshes or Prosima procedures (n = 95) using non-anchored, original meshes were assessed. A detailed comparison of 1 year outcomes was made.

RESULTS

Of the 180 patients, 172 (95.6%) attended the 1-year follow-up. Demographic data were similar between groups except a higher average age (64.5 vs 60.4, P = 0.001) was noted in the Elevate (n = 84) group compared to the Prosima (n = 88) group. Surgical results were also similar except a significantly higher objective cure (POP stage ≦1) rate (89.3% vs 78.4%, P = 0.042) was noted in the Elevate group. The safety profile favored Elevate with a lower, but not statistically significant, rate (4.7% vs 12.5%, P = 0.106) of vaginal mesh exposure. After a statistical analysis, we found anatomic recurrence (POP stage ≧2) after the SIVM procedures had strong (P < 0.05) associations with "early surgical cases," "Prosima procedure," "advanced cystocele (Ba > +3 cm)," and "prior prolapse repair," respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Beyond a learning curve, Elevate performed better than Prosima in POP repair regarding surgical effectiveness. Meanwhile, several predisposing factors that may affect recurrence after SIVM procedures were found.

Tension-free polypropylene mesh-related surgical repair for pelvic organ prolapse has a good anatomic success rate but a high risk of complications

BACKGROUND

Food and Drug Administration announcements have highlighted the standard rate of mesh-related complications. We aimed to report the short-term results and complications of tension-free polypropylene mesh (PROSIMA™) surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) using the standard category (C), timing (T), and site (S) classification system.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of 48 patients who underwent PROSIMA™ mesh kit-related surgical repairs were followed for two years at Peking Union Medical College Hospital. Recurrence was defined as symptomatic POP quantification (POP-Q) Stage II or higher (leading edge ≥ -1 cm). The Patient Global Impression of Change Questionnaire, the Chinese version of the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire short-form-7 and POP/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire short-form-12 were used to evaluate the self-perception and sexual function of each patient. Mesh-related complications conformed to the International Urogynecological Association/International Continence Society joint terminology. The paired-sample t-test, one-way analysis of variance, Fisher's exact test, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and log-rank test were used to analyze data.

RESULTS

All patients were followed up for ≥12 months; 30 (62.5%) patients completed the 24 months study. We observed a 93.8% (45/48) positive anatomical outcome rate at 12 months and 90.0% (27/30) at 24 months. Recurrence most frequently involved the anterior compartment (P < 0.05). Pelvic symptoms improved significantly from baseline (P < 0.05), although the patients' impressions of change and sexual function were not satisfying. Vaginal complication was the main complication observed (35.4%, 17/48). The survival analysis did not identify any relationship between vaginal complication and anatomical recurrent prolapse (POP-Q ≥ Stage II) (P = 0.653).

CONCLUSIONS

Tension-free polypropylene mesh (PROSIMA™ )-related surgical repair of POP has better short-term anatomical outcomes at the apical and posterior compartments, but a low patient satisfaction rate. The mesh complications were not the definitive cause of recurrence.

Factors that affect early recurrence after prolapse repair by a nonanchored vaginal mesh procedure

OBJECTIVE

Prosima (Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA) is a novel procedure for treating pelvic organ prolapse (POP) that uses nonanchored vaginal mesh. However, nonfixation of the mesh may limit effectiveness. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and limitations of this procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2011 through to December 2011, 52 patients with symptomatic POP ≥ Stage 2 undergoing the Prosima procedure at a tertiary hospital were enrolled consecutively in this prospective study. A Data and Safety Monitoring Plan (DSMP) was developed to assess the results.

RESULTS

Fifty of the 52 patients (96%) attended the 3-6-month postoperative assessment. Symptom and quality-of-life scores were found to have improved significantly after surgery (p < 0.05). Forty-two patients (84%) underwent successful treatment for POP (Stage 0-1). The other eight patients (16%) were found to have recurrent Stage 2 anterior vaginal wall prolapse, although most of them (5/8) were asymptomatic. The highest morbidity, namely vaginal mesh exposure, occurred in four patients (8%) and was managed as a minor issue. Statistical analysis showed that anatomic recurrence was significantly (p < 0.05) associated with a "preoperative Ba ≥ +4 cm" (odds ratio = 20.57), "conservation of the prolapsed uterus" (odds ratio = 10.56) and "use of a concomitant midurethral sling" (odds ratio = 0.076).

CONCLUSION

Prosima seems to have limitations when used to manage severe anterior vaginal wall prolapse and concomitant surgery may further affect its effectiveness. The information obtained from this study's DSMP will contribute to developing a strategy to improve the use of nonanchored vaginal mesh for POP repair.

Epidemiology and outcome assessment of pelvic organ prolapse

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

The aim was to determine the incidence and prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse surgery and describe how outcomes are reported.

METHODS

Every 4 years and as part of the Fifth International Collaboration on Incontinence we reviewed the English-language scientific literature after searching PubMed, Medline, Cochrane library and Cochrane database of systematic reviews, published up to January 2012. Publications were classified as level 1 evidence (randomised controlled trials [RCT] or systematic reviews, level 2 (poor quality RCT, prospective cohort studies), level 3 (case series or retrospective studies) and level 4 (case reports). The highest level of evidence was utilised by the committee to make evidence-based recommendations based upon the Oxford grading system. A grade A recommendation usually depends on consistent level 1 evidence. A grade B recommendation usually depends on consistent level 2 and/or 3 studies, or "majority evidence" from RCTs. A grade C recommendation usually depends on level 4 studies or "majority evidence" from level 2/3 studies or Delphi processed expert opinion. A grade D "no recommendation possible" would be used where the evidence is inadequate or conflicting and when expert opinion is delivered without a formal analytical process, such as by Delphi .

RESULTS

Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) when defined by symptoms has a prevalence of 3-6% and up to 50% when based upon vaginal examination. Surgery for prolapse is performed twice as commonly as continence surgery and prevalence varies widely from 6 to 18%. The incidence of POP surgery ranges from 1.5 to 1.8 per 1,000 women years and peaks in women aged 60-69. When reporting outcomes of the surgical management of prolapse, authors should include a variety of standardised anatomical and functional outcomes. Anatomical outcomes reported should include all POP-Q points and staging, utilising a traditional definition of success with the hymen as the threshold for success. Assessment should be prospective and assessors blinded as to the surgical intervention performed if possible and without any conflict of interest related to the assessment undertaken (grade C). Subjective success postoperatively should be defined as the absence of a vaginal bulge (grade C). Functional outcomes are best reported using valid, reliable and responsive symptom questionnaires and condition-specific HRQOL instruments (grade C). Sexual function is best reported utilising validated condition-specific HRQOL that assess sexual function or validated sexual function questionnaires such as the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ) or the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). The sexual activity status of all study participants should be reported pre- and postoperatively under the following categories: sexually active without pain, sexually active with pain or not sexually active (grade C). Prolapse surgery should be defined as primary surgery, and repeat surgery sub-classified as primary surgery different site, repeat surgery, complications related to surgery and surgery for non-prolapse-related conditions (grade C).

CONCLUSION

Significant variation exists in the prevalence and incidence of pelvic organ prolapse surgery and how the outcomes are reported. Much of the variation may be improved by standardisation of definitions and outcomes of reporting on pelvic organ prolapse surgery.