Balancing the possibility of needing a future incontinence procedure versus a future urethral sling revision surgery: a tradeoff analysis for continent women undergoing pelvic organ prolapse surgery

Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Reporting of Events Related to Transvaginal Mesh: Understanding the Data

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine potential bias in reports to the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database involving vaginal mesh by identifying the party submitting the report, the nature of the complaints, and whether the reports were edited.

METHODS

All reports submitted to the MAUDE database involving synthetic transvaginal mesh from January 2000 through December 2017 (40,266 safety reports) were identified. A random 2% sample (900) of these reports was reviewed in depth to determine the specific relevant details, including reporter type (patient, manufacturer, lawyer) and details of the complaint/injury.

RESULTS

Of the 40,226 reports to MAUDE identified, 28,473 (70.7%) were sling reports, and 11,793 (29.3%) described mesh products augmenting pelvic organ prolapse repair. Of the 900 reports reviewed in depth, 46%, 41%, 10%, and 2% of entries were reported by the manufacturer, attorney, health care provider, and patients, respectively. In the 4 years after submission, 18.6% of reports were modified at least once.

CONCLUSIONS

The MAUDE database allows physicians, manufacturers, and patients to immediately report adverse events experienced due to medical devices. While this database is an important means to identify potential danger to patients, any individual can file a report and, thus, it should not be the sole source of evidence to consider when assessing device safety. Further, the MAUDE database provides no information into the total number of cases performed without complication.

Incidence of Midurethral Sling Revision or Removal by Its Timing With Prolapse Surgery

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate incidence of midurethral sling removal/revision based on timing with surgery for pelvic organ prolapse.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of women who underwent midurethral sling placement in a claims-based database of women 65 years or older. Three groups were identified using the Current Procedural Terminology codes: (1) isolated sling, (2) concomitant sling, and (3) prolapse surgery and staged sling after prolapse surgery. In the staged group, placement of sling was identified within 18 months after index prolapse surgery. Fascial grafts were excluded. Sling removal/revision was identified across 3 years after sling surgery using Current Procedural Terminology code 57287. Rates of sling removal/revision were calculated by group. Comparisons were made using the χ2 test and analysis of variance. Cumulative incidence of removal/revision was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox proportional hazards was performed to evaluate factors influencing removal/revision.

RESULTS

We identified 39,381 isolated MUSs, 25,389 concomitant, and 886 staged. The rate of sling removal/revision was 3.52%. Rates of removal/revision differed between groups (7% staged vs 3.94% concomitant vs 3.17% isolated sling, P < 0.001). Compared with the staged group, the rate of removal/revision was lower in the isolated sling group (relative risk, 0.4550; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.358-0.568) and the concomitant group (relative risk, 0.5666; 95% CI, 0.4450-0.7287). After adjusting for patient characteristics, sling revision or removal remained significantly less in the isolated MUS (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39-0.65) and concomitant (odds ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.43-0.71) groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Sling removal/revision is higher when it is staged after prolapse surgery compared with isolated and concomitant placement. Future studies are needed to confirm these findings in a controlled population.

Inverse correlation between urethral length and continence before and after native tissue pelvic floor reconstruction

Urethral length was evaluated retrospectively in patients with prolapse undergoing anterior native-tissue repair. Effects of age, prolapse stage, defect pattern, urodynamic and clinical stress test findings, and tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) surgery indication were analyzed using Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon tests and linear and logistic regression. Of 394 patients, 61% had stage II/III and 39% had stage IV prolapse; 90% of defects were central (10% were lateral). Median pre- and postoperative urethral lengths were 14 and 22 mm (p < 0.01). Preoperative urethral length was greater with lateral defects [p < 0.01, B 6.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.67-8.08] and increased stress incontinence risk (p < 0.01, odds ratio 1.07, 95% CI 1.03-1.12). Postoperative urethral length depended on prolapse stage (p < 0.01, B 1.61, 95% CI 0.85-2.38) and defect type (p = 0.02, B - 1.42, 95% CI - 2.65 to - 0.2). Postoperatively, TVT surgery was indicated in 5.1% of patients (median 9 months), who had longer urethras than those without this indication (p = 0.043). Native-tissue prolapse repair including Kelly plication increased urethral length, reflecting re-urethralization, particularly with central defects. The functional impact of urethral length in the context of connective tissue aging should be examined further.