Road to recovery after transvaginal surgery for urethral mesh perforation: evaluation of outcomes and subsequent procedures

Surgical Removal of Midurethral Sling in Women Undergoing Surgery for Presumed Mesh-Related Complications: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether some, or all, of the mesh needs to be removed when a midurethral sling is removed for complications.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. MEDLINE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from January 1, 1996, through May 1, 2021, were searched for articles that met the eligibility criteria with total, partial, or a combination of anti-incontinence mesh removal.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

All study designs were included (N≥10), and a priori criteria were used for acceptance standards. Studies were extracted for demographics, operative outcomes, and adverse events. Meta-analysis was performed when possible.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

We double-screened 11,887 abstracts; 45 eligible and unique studies were identified. Thirty-five were single-group studies that evaluated partial mesh removal, five were single-group studies that evaluated total mesh removal, and five were studies that compared partial mesh removal with total mesh removal. All of the studies were retrospective in nature; there were no randomized controlled studies. Comparative studies demonstrated that partial mesh removal had lower rates of postoperative stress urinary incontinence (SUI) than total mesh removal (odds ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.22-0.96). Single-group studies supported lower rates of postoperative SUI with partial mesh removal compared with total mesh removal (19.2% [95% CI 13.5-25.7] vs 48.7% [95% CI 31.2-66.4]). Both methods were similar with respect to associated pain, bladder outlet obstruction, mesh erosion or exposure, and lower urinary tract symptoms. Adverse events were infrequent.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative SUI may be lower with partial mesh removal compared with total mesh removal. Other outcomes were similar regardless of the amount of mesh removed.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD 42018093099.

Urethral exposure of mid-urethral sling: diagnosis, management and functional outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To identify symptoms leading to urethral mesh exposure diagnosis, describe the surgical management and evaluate post-operative functional and urodynamic outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective observational monocentric study of 15 patients treated by mid-urethral sling removal for urethral exposure, between December 2005 and February 2021, in a pelviperineology centre.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were included. The mean time to diagnosis of urethral exposure was 43 months. This diagnosis delay was caused by a non-specific symptomatology. Surgical management consisted of partial removal of the eroded mid-urethral sling fragment by vaginal approach in all cases, with low peri-operative morbidity. At three months follow-up, 87% of the patients had stress urinary incontinence versus 54% at two years. 13 patients had a urodynamic assessment after their mid-urethral sling removal, they all had sphincter insufficiency with a urethral closure pressure lower than 30 cm H₂O. Nine patients underwent a second urinary incontinence management procedure, leading to 77% of complete remission and 23% of partial improvement.

CONCLUSION

Clinical presentation of urethral erosion after mid-urethral sling is heterogeneous. Surgical management is complex; after a good preoperative evaluation, a two-step management strategy including minimally invasive mid-urethral sling removal and treatment of recurrent urinary incontinence leads to good results with 77% of patients cured. Sphincter insufficiency is one of the mechanisms that may explain the high rate of stress urinary incontinence after urethral mesh erosion surgery.

[Surgical management of suburethral sling complications and functional outcomes]

OBJECTIVES

To identify various clinical presentation leading to the diagnosis of mid-urethral sling (MUS) complications and to analyze the functional outcomes after surgical management of these complications.

METHOD

Retrospective observational monocentric study of all patients treated by MUS section or removal, between December 2005 and October 2019, in a pelviperineology centre.

RESULTS

During this study, 96 patients were included. MUS complications surgically managed were vaginal mesh exposure (48 %), urethral mesh exposure (17 %), bladder mesh exposure (10 %); dysuria (30 %), pain (6 %), and infection (3 %). The mean time to diagnosis was 2 years. This diagnosis delay was caused by a non-specific and heterogeneous symptomatology. Surgical management consisted in MUS partial removal (79 %) and MUS simple section (21 %) with low perioperative morbidity. At three months follow-up, 36 patients (53 %) had stress urinary incontinence (SUI), including 13 (19 %) de novo (meaning no SUI before MUS section/removal) and 19 (28 %) had overactive bladder, including 9 (13 %) de novo. Half of the patients with SUI after MUS section/removal were able to be treated by a second MUS with a success rate of 83 % at 3 years.

CONCLUSION

Clinical presentation of MUS complications is heterogeneous. Surgical treatment was associated with low morbidity in our study. Post-operatively, half of the patients had SUI and a second MUS was a relevant treatment option after proper evaluation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Do we have adequate data to construct a valid algorithm for management of synthetic midurethral sling complications? ICI-RS 2019

BACKGROUND

Synthetic midurethral sling (MUS) procedures, purported for the last two decades as the gold standard surgical treatment for stress urinary incontinence, have been in creasingly scrutinized in recent years with regard to the rate and severity of complications.

METHODS

During the International Consultation on Incontinence Research Society meeting held in Bristol, UK, in 2019, a multidisciplinary panel held a think tank and discussed the contemporary evidence pertaining to the classification, investigation, and treatment of MUS complications.

RESULTS

The current classification system of mesh-related complications was discussed, and shortcomings were identified. The lack of a standardized clinical pathway was noted, and the value of clinical investigations and surgical treatments was difficult to fully evaluate. The paucity of high-level evidence was a common factor in all discussions, and the difficulties with setting up relevant randomized-controlled trials were highlighted.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcome of the think-tank discussions is summarized with a set of recommendations designed to stimulate future research.

Exploring stress urinary incontinence outcomes after sling excision for perforation or exposure

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed stress urinary incontinence (SUI) outcomes after sling excision for urinary tract perforation or vaginal exposure, and compared the outcomes of concomitant versus staged autologous fascia pubovaginal sling (AFPVS).

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent midurethral sling (MUS) excision for urinary tract perforation or vaginal exposure at a tertiary referral center between 2010 and 2015 was performed. Therapeutic strategies were categorized as concomitant AFPVS, staged AFPVS, and no anti-incontinence procedure.

RESULTS

In all, 32 patients were included for analysis: 13 with vaginal tape exposure (40.6%) and 19 with urinary tract tape exposure (59.4%). In patients who had SUI prior to sling excision (43.8%), the rate of resolved or improved SUI postoperatively was higher in the concomitant AFPVS group than in those who underwent sling excision alone (83.3% vs 12.5%, respectively; P = 0.03). Of 18 patients with no SUI prior to sling excision, 12 experienced recurrent SUI after sling removal (66.7%). The rate of recurrent SUI was lower in patients with vaginal MUS exposure than urinary tract MUS perforation, but this did not reach statistical significance (57.1% vs 72.7%, respectively; P = 0.63). The rates of resolved SUI after AFPVS were comparable in patients with concomitant and staged AFPVS (66.7% vs 71.4%, respectively; P = 0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Many patients with MUS perforations or exposures will have SUI at initial presentation or develop SUI after removal of the synthetic sling. The decision to perform a concomitant AFPVS or to stage the surgical management of SUI can be individualized.

Management of urological injury at the time of urogynaecology surgery

The presentation and management of bladder, ureteric and urethral injuries during and following urogynaecology surgery are discussed. Applied anatomy is reviewed, and the surgical management of injuries diagnosed intra- and post-operatively is discussed.