Management of Mesh and Graft Complications in Gynecologic Surgery

Mesh Infection in Sacrocolpopexy: A Novel Approach to Management

Surgical mesh has been in use for urogynecological surgeries for a long, but they come with their own side effect profile and maybe life-altering consequences. We discuss a novel method of management of mesh erosion and infection in a patient with mesh sacrocolpopexy.

Concurrent Retropubic Midurethral Sling and OnabotulinumtoxinA for Mixed Urinary Incontinence: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether retropubic midurethral sling combined with onabotulinumtoxinA is more effective than sling alone in improving mixed urinary incontinence symptoms.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial of women with mixed urinary incontinence, planning to undergo midurethral sling. Women were randomly assigned to receive 100 unites of intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA or placebo during surgery. Participants completed the PGI-S (Patient Global Impression of Severity), the UDI-6 (Urinary Distress Inventory, Short Form), and the PFIQ-7 (Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-Short Form 7) before and 3 months after surgery, and the primary outcome, PGI-I (Patient Global Impression of Improvement), 3 months postoperatively. Primary outcome was PGI-I score at 3 months for overall incontinence. We considered women "improved" with answers of "very much better" or "much better" on the PGI-I. Assuming a PGI-I response of "improved" in 66% of placebo and 93% of onabotulinumtoxinA participants, 68 women were needed to show a significant difference with 80% power at 0.05 significance level.

RESULTS

From March 2016 to November 2019, 78 women completed a 3-month follow-up (onabotulinumtoxinA: 41; placebo: 37). Mean age was 51 years (±10). On the PGI-I, the number who "improved" did not differ between groups at 3 months (83% vs 84%, P=1.0). The onabotulinumtoxinA group had less severe urgency symptoms as indicated by median urgency PGI-S scores (1 [interquartile range 1-2] vs 2 [interquartile range 1-3], P=.033) and greater improvement in urgency symptoms based on median urgency PGI-I score (1 [interquartile range 1-3] vs 2 [interquartile range 2-4], P=.028). At 3 months, median UDI-6, PFIQ-7, and PGI-S scores improved significantly from baseline in both groups. Similarly, UDI-6 and PFIQ-7 scores did not differ between groups. More women in the onabotulinumtoxinA arm initiated intermittent self-catheterization, (3% placebo; 12% onabotulinumtoxinA, P=.20) and experienced urinary tract infections (5% placebo; 22% onabotulinumtoxinA, P=.051), but these did not differ statistically.

CONCLUSION

Concurrent intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA injection did not improve overall incontinence symptoms at 3 months compared with placebo among women with mixed urinary incontinence undergoing midurethral sling placement. Women with mixed urinary incontinence undergoing sling report significant improvement in overall incontinence symptoms, regardless of the addition of onabotulinumtoxinA injections, but those receiving concurrent onabotulinumtoxinA injections reported less urgency severity and greater improvement in urgency symptoms at 3 months.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02678377.

Is a pelvic examination contributory in the initial evaluation of women with recurrent urinary tract infections?

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Recurrent urinary tract infections (rUTIs) affect up to 44% of women; evidenced-based guidelines regarding the contributory role of a pelvic examination in these women are lacking. We hypothesize that routine pelvic examination has a limited role in evaluation and management of women with rUTI when appropriate symptoms-based screening is performed and normal post-void residual volume (PVR) is confirmed.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review of women ages 18-85 years presenting to Wake Forest Pelvic Health Center with two culture-proven UTIs in 6 months or three UTIs in 12 months with a documented pelvic examination. Pregnant women were excluded. Data extraction included demographics, medical history, screening assessment of vaginal bulge symptoms, urine culture results, imaging, physical/pelvic examination findings, PVR, treatment recommendations and outcomes within 1 year of initial assessment. Descriptive statistics and Fisher's exact test were performed.

RESULTS

Of 160 charts screened, 91 met the inclusion criteria. Nineteen (21%) had symptoms of vaginal bulge, and 14 (17%) had PVR > 100 ml. Pelvic examination provided new/contributory information in eight (8.8%) of women. The negative predictive value of absence of bulge symptoms and normal PVR was 89%. Within 1 year, 41 (46%) reported symptom resolution with rUTI treatment with no difference between those with or without a contributory pelvic examination (p value = 0.64).

CONCLUSIONS

In women with rUTI who report absence of vaginal bulge symptoms and have a PVR < 100 ml, a pelvic examination provides contributory information in < 10% of women and did not change treatment outcomes.

Historic transvaginal meshes and procedures: what did my patient have done?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Transvaginal mesh kits were widely used to treat pelvic organ prolapse for over a 10-year period in the early 2000s. Due to safety concerns and FDA regulations, these mesh kits are no longer available for use. Thus, current Obstetricians and Gynecologists are likely to encounter these meshes, but may have no previous experience or exposure to the devices making it difficult to adequately monitor, counsel, and care for patients that underwent these types of procedures. This review highlights the most commonly used transvaginal mesh kit types, provides insight into signs and symptoms related to transvaginal mesh complications, and provides guidance for management of mesh complications.

RECENT FINDINGS

Not all transvaginal mesh will give rise to a complication. If complications do occur, treatment options range from conservative observation to total mesh excision. Management must be customized to an individual patient's needs and goals.

SUMMARY

Transvaginal mesh kits promised increased durability of surgical repair for pelvic organ prolapse. Safety concerns over time caused these kits to no longer be available for use. Practicing Obstetricians and Gynecologists should be aware of the history of transvaginal mesh and the signs and symptoms of mesh complications.

Observational analysis of mesh related complications in urogynecologic procedures

Since the 1990s, the use of mesh has expanded in gynecologic surgeries in the aim of correcting pelvic organ prolapse. Because there has been a lot of complications that were reported, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has requested the withdrawal of many products from the market. Recently, many countries have called for the suspension of vaginal mesh products from the market. The objective of this review is to analyze the incidence of the complications that arise after vaginal mesh surgeries with an insight to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommendations on the management of those complications.