Vaginal native tissue repair versus transvaginal mesh repair for apical prolapse: how utilizing different methods of analysis affects the estimated trade-off between reoperation for mesh exposure/erosion and reoperation for recurrent prolapse

Short term complications in mesh augmented vaginal repair of pelvic organ prolapse are not higher when compared with native tissue repair

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Accumulating evidence regarding the negative long-term consequences of transvaginal mesh-based procedures for pelvic organ prolapse has led to a sharp decline in mesh-based procedures. We aimed to evaluate the short-term complications of mesh-based procedures for carefully selected patients with pelvic organ prolapse after Food and Drug Administration warnings.

METHODS

A retrospective database review of the ACS NSQIP database was completed to examine 30-day complications including re-operation, prolonged length of stay, blood transfusion, surgical site infection, urinary tract infection, readmission and wound dehiscence in mesh-augmented and native tissue-based transvaginal procedures for pelvic organ prolapse.

RESULTS

A total of 36,234 patients were included in the analysis, with only 7.1% (2574 women) having mesh-augmented repair. Using a multivariable logistical regression analysis adjusting for confounders, we found that the primary composite outcome (re-operation, hospital stay, blood transfusion and surgical site infection) was less common in the mesh group compared with the native tissue repair group (adjusted OR 0.80, CI 0.67-0.95, p = 0.009). The secondary outcomes (urinary tract infection, re-admission and wound dehiscence) were not different between the group.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that in well-chosen patients, short-term complications are not increased when using transvaginal mesh for pelvic organ prolapse repair.

Safety and short term outcomes of a new truly minimallyinvasive mesh-less and dissection-less anchoring system for pelvic organ prolapse apical repair

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and short term outcomes of a new, truly minimallyinvasive, mesh-less and dissection-less anchoring system for pelvic floor apical repair.

METHODS

A prospective study was conducted using the NeuGuide™ device system for pelvic floor apical repair. The primary effectiveness outcome was centro-apical pelvic floor prolapse by POP-Q after six months. The primary safety outcome was intra-operative, immediate (first 48 h) post-operative complications and adverse effects after six months. A standardized questionnaire (UDI-6) to assess quality of life at entry and during follow-up visits was used. Patients' six months-follow-up and evaluation are reported.

RESULTS

The mean age of the study population (n=10) was 63.8±12.0 years. All patients had a previous prolapse surgery. Five had a previous hysterectomy and two had stress urinary incontinence symptoms. During surgery six patients had a concurrent colporrhaphy. There was no injury to the bladder, rectum, pudendal nerves, or major pelvic vessels and no febrile morbidity was recorded. At six months, no cases of centro-apical recurrence were noted. Patients were satisfied with the procedure and had favorable quality of life scores. Using the UDI-6 questionnaire an improvement, in all domains was seen. Moreover, although the sample size was small, the improvement in urge and overflow incontinence related domains were demonstrated to be statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

This new NeuGuide™ device allows rapid and safe introduction of a suspending suture through the sacrospinous ligament and makes sacrospinous ligament fixation easy to perform, while avoiding dissection and mesh complications.