Reoperations for mesh-related complications after pelvic organ prolapse repair: 8-year experience at a tertiary referral center

Long-term outcomes of transvaginal mesh surgery for pelvic organ prolapse at a single center in Japan

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the long-term effectiveness and safety of transvaginal mesh surgery for pelvic organ prolapse at a high-volume center in Japan.

METHODS

Patients who underwent transvaginal mesh surgery between March 2010 and August 2015 were included and followed up for 5 years. As no mesh kits were available in our country, we used a self-cut polypropylene mesh (Japanese-style transvaginal mesh) for the procedures. Objective anatomical restoration and complications were evaluated during outpatient examinations.

RESULTS

Overall, 711 patients were included in this study. Over 5 years, the recurrence rate of stage 2 or higher prolapse at the operated compartment was 8.6% (61 cases), whereas that at the other compartments was 12.8% (91 cases). The frequency of recurrence was highest at 3 months and decreased with each passing year in both compartments. During the follow-up period, 28 patients (three at the operated compartment and 25 at the other compartments) required reoperation owing to recurrence. Overall, there were 13 cases of mesh exposure (1.8%), including two (0.28%) in the bladder, 10 (1.4%) in the vagina, and one (0.14%) in the rectum. Urinary incontinence surgery was performed in 69 patients (9.7%) during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

The frequencies of recurrence requiring reoperation and mesh-related complications were low, and vaginal mesh exposure was mostly asymptomatic. Therefore, the Japanese-style transvaginal mesh is safe and effective.

The Presence of Preoperative Urinary Incontinence Significantly Correlates With Postoperative Urinary Incontinence Following Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy

PURPOSE

Urinary incontinence (UI) is a significant complication following surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP), including laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC). Although the incidence of postoperative UI is lower after LSC than after transvaginal mesh surgery, a subset of patients still experience UI. This study aimed to determine which factors, including mesh-related factors, contribute to UI impairing daily life following LSC.

METHODS

The study enrolled 96 patients who underwent LSC at our institution between June 2016 and September 2023. The Pearson chi-square test, multiple logistic regression analysis, and Cox proportional hazards model were used to determine the independent factors contributing to UI after LSC.

RESULTS

The Pearson chi-square test showed that body mass index, POP quantification (POP-Q) stage 4 and the presence of preoperative UI significantly correlated with the postoperative UI among preoperative and intraoperative factors (all P<0.05). POP-Q stage 4 and the presence of preoperative UI were also significant factors in both univariate and multivariate analyses of multiple logistic regression analysis (all P<0.05). However, only preoperative UI remained an independent predictor for shorter time to UI onset in the multivariate Cox proportional hazards model (hazard ratio, 3.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-11.58; P=0.0158).

CONCLUSION

Patients with preoperative UI and stage 4 POP should receive close monitoring for postoperative UI.

Diagnosis and management of complications following pelvic organ prolapse surgery using a synthetic mesh: French national guidelines for clinical practice

Complications associated with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery using a synthetic non-absorbable mesh are uncommon (<5%) but may be severe and may hugely diminish the quality of life of some women. In drawing up these multidisciplinary clinical practice recommendations, the French National Authority for Health (Haute Autorité de santé, HAS) conducted an exhaustive review of the literature concerning the diagnosis, prevention, and management of complications associated with POP surgery using a synthetic mesh. Each recommendation for practice was allocated a grade (A,B or C; or expert opinion (EO)), which depends on the level of evidence (clinical practice guidelines).

PREOPERATIVE PATIENTS' INFORMATION

Each patient must be informed concerning the risks associated with POP surgery (EO).

HEMORRHAGE, HEMATOMA

Vaginal infiltration using a vasoconstrictive solution is not recommended during POP surgery by the vaginal route (grade C). The placement of vaginal packing is not recommended following POP surgery by the vaginal route (grade C). During laparoscopic sacral colpopexy, when the promontory seems highly dangerous or when severe adhesions prevent access to the anterior vertebral ligament, alternative surgical techniques should be discussed per operatively, including colpopexy by lateral mesh laparoscopic suspension, uterosacral ligament suspension, open abdominal mesh surgery, or surgery by the vaginal route (EO).

BLADDER INJURY

When a bladder injury is diagnosed, bladder repair by suturing is recommended, using a slow resorption suture thread, plus monitoring of the permeability of the ureters (before and after bladder repair) when the injury is located at the level of the trigone (EO). When a bladder injury is diagnosed, after bladder repair, a prosthetic mesh (polypropylene or polyester material) can be placed between the repaired bladder and the vagina, if the quality of the suturing is good. The recommended duration of bladder catheterization following bladder repair in this context of POP mesh surgery is from 5 to 10 days (EO).

URETER INJURY

After ureteral repair, it is possible to continue sacral colpopexy and place the mesh if it is located away from the ureteral repair (EO).

RECTAL INJURY

Regardless of the approach, when a rectal injury occurs, a posterior mesh should not be placed between the rectum and the vagina wall (EO). Concerning the anterior mesh, it is recommended to use a macroporous monofilament polypropylene mesh (EO). A polyester mesh is not recommended in this situation (EO).

VAGINAL WALL INJURY

After vaginal wall repair, an anterior or a posterior microporous polypropylene mesh can be placed, if the quality of the repair is found to be satisfactory (EO). A polyester mesh should not be used after vaginal wall repair (EO).

MESH INFECTION (ABSCESS, CELLULITIS, SPONDYLODISCITIS)

Regardless of the surgical approach, intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended (aminopenicillin + beta-lactamase inhibitor: 30 min before skin incision +/- repeated after 2 h if surgery lasts longer) (EO). When spondylodiscitis is diagnosed following sacral colpopexy, treatment should be discussed by a multidisciplinary group, including especially spine specialists (rheumatologists, orthopedists, neurosurgeons) and infectious disease specialists (EO). When a pelvic abscess occurs following synthetic mesh sacral colpopexy, it is recommended to carry out complete mesh removal as soon as possible, combined with collection of intraoperative bacteriological samples, drainage of the collection and targeted antibiotic therapy (EO). Non-surgical conservative management with antibiotic therapy may be an option (EO) in certain conditions (absence of signs of sepsis, macroporous monofilament polypropylene type 1 mesh, prior microbiological documentation and multidisciplinary consultation for the choice of type and duration of antibiotic therapy), associated with close monitoring of the patient.

BOWEL OCCLUSION RELATED TO NON-CLOSURE OF THE PERITONEUM

Peritoneal closure is recommended after placement of a synthetic mesh by the abdominal approach (EO).

URINARY RETENTION

Preoperative urodynamics is recommended in women presenting with urinary symptoms (bladder outlet obstruction symptoms, overactive bladder syndrome or incontinence) (EO). It is recommended to remove the bladder catheter at the end of the procedure or within 48 h after POP surgery (grade B). Bladder emptying and post-void residual should be checked following POP surgery, before discharge (EO). When postoperative urine retention occurs after POP surgery, it is recommended to carry out indwelling catheterization and to prefer intermittent self-catheterization (EO).

POSTOPERATIVE PAIN

Before POP surgery, the patient should be asked about risk factors for prolonged and chronic postoperative pain (pain sensitization, allodynia, chronic pelvic or non-pelvic pain) (EO). Concerning the prevention of postoperative pain, it is recommended to carry out a pre-, per- and postoperative multimodal pain treatment (grade B). The use of ketamine intraoperatively is recommended for the prevention of chronic postoperative pelvic pain, especially for patients with risk factors (preoperative painful sensitization, allodynia, chronic pelvic or non-pelvic pain) (EO). Postoperative prescription of opioids should be limited in quantity and duration (grade C). When acute neuropathic pain (sciatalgia or pudendal neuralgia) resistant to level I and II analgesics occurs following sacrospinous fixation, a reintervention is recommended for suspension suture removal (EO). When chronic postoperative pain occurs after POP surgery, it is recommended to systematically seek arguments in favor of neuropathic pain with the DN4 questionnaire (EO). When chronic postoperative pelvic pain occurs after POP surgery, central sensitization should be identified since it requires a consultation in a chronic pain department (EO). Concerning myofascial pain syndrome (clinical pain condition associated with increased muscle tension caused by myofascial trigger points), when chronic postoperative pain occurs after POP surgery, it is recommended to examine the levator ani, piriformis and obturator internus muscles, so as to identify trigger points on the pathway of the synthetic mesh (EO). Pelvic floor muscle training with muscle relaxation is recommended when myofascial pain syndrome is associated with chronic postoperative pain following POP surgery (EO). After failure of pelvic floor muscle training (3 months), it is recommended to discuss surgical removal of the synthetic mesh, during a multidisciplinary discussion group meeting (EO). Partial removal of synthetic mesh is indicated when a trigger point is located on the pathway of the mesh (EO). Total removal of synthetic mesh should be discussed during a multidisciplinary discussion group meeting when diffuse (no trigger point) chronic postoperative pain occurs following POP surgery, with or without central sensitization or neuropathic pain syndromes (EO).

POSTOPERATIVE DYSPAREUNIA

When de novo postoperative dyspareunia occurs after POP surgery, surgical removal of the mesh should be discussed (EO).

VAGINAL MESH EXPOSURE

To reduce the risk of vaginal mesh exposure, when hysterectomy is required during sacral colpopexy, subtotal hysterectomy is recommended (grade C). When asymptomatic vaginal macroporous monofilament polypropylene mesh exposure occurs, systematic imaging is not recommended. When vaginal polyester mesh exposure occurs, pelvic +/- lumbar MRI (EO) should be used to look for an abscess or spondylodiscitis, given the greater risk of infection associated with this type of material. When asymptomatic vaginal mesh exposure of less than 1 cm2 occurs in a woman with no sexual intercourse, the patient should be offered observation (no treatment) or local estrogen therapy (EO). However, if the patient wishes, partial excision of the mesh can be offered. When asymptomatic vaginal mesh exposure of more than 1 cm2 occurs or if the woman has sexual intercourse, or if it is a polyester prosthesis, partial mesh excision, either immediately or after local estrogen therapy, should be offered (EO). When symptomatic vaginal mesh exposure occurs, but without infectious complications, surgical removal of the exposed part of the mesh by the vaginal route is recommended (EO), and not systematic complete excision of the mesh. Following sacral colpopexy, complete removal of the mesh (by laparoscopy or laparotomy) is only required in the presence of an abscess or spondylodiscitis (EO). When vaginal mesh exposure recurs after a first reoperation, the patient should be treated by an experienced team specialized in this type of complication (EO).

SUTURE THREAD VAGINAL EXPOSURE

For women presenting with vaginal exposure to non-absorbable suture thread following POP surgery with mesh reinforcement, the suture thread should be removed by the vaginal route (EO). Removal of the surrounding mesh is only recommended when vaginal mesh exposure or associated abscess is diagnosed.

BLADDER AND URETERAL MESH EXPOSURE

When bladder mesh exposure occurs, removal of the exposed part of the mesh is recommended (grade B). Both alternatives (total or partial mesh removal) should be discussed with the patient and should be debated during a multidisciplinary discussion group meeting (EO).

When things go wrong: experiences of vaginal mesh complications

INTRODUCTION

Previous research has suggested that complications stemming from vaginal mesh can lead to life-changing negative physical consequences including erosion and chronic pain. However, there has been little research on the experiences of women who have had complications. This study was aimed at exploring the individual experiences of women who have had vaginal mesh complications and how this has impacted them.

METHODS

An explorative qualitative design was followed. Eighteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with women who had experienced complications with vaginal mesh due to stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. The mean age was 52 and the mean time since the mesh was fitted was 8 years (6 had since had it removed and a further 6 had had partial removal), and the mean time since first mesh-related symptom was 10 months. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Four main themes were identified: perceived impact of mesh complications, attitudes of medical professionals, social support and positive growth. Results showed that participant experiences of their mesh complication were psychologically traumatic, including feelings of increased anxiety and fears relating to suicidal thoughts. Intimate relationships were also affected, with reduced sexual functioning and intimacy stemming from mesh complications. Negative experiences with medical professionals included feeling dismissed, a lack of recognition of their symptoms, and anger towards the profession.

CONCLUSIONS

The impacts of vaginal mesh complications were found to be wide-reaching and life-changing, affecting numerous aspects of participants' lives. Greater awareness in this area is needed to provide further support for women experiencing vaginal mesh complications.

Long-Term Outcomes and Complications of Trans-Vaginal Mesh Removal: a 14-year Experience

OBJECTIVE

To assess the long-term patient outcomes, including the resolution of symptoms and need for subsequent procedures, after vaginal mesh removals (VMR) we evaluate our 14-year experience with VMR from a tertiary center with three FPMRS-trained surgeons. Although the use of transvaginal mesh (TVM) had decreased significantly before its ban in 2019, surgeons are still treating TVM complications and performing vaginal or open/robotic VMR for mesh-related complications.

METHODS

A retrospective review of women undergoing VMR with 6 months minimum follow-up was undertaken. The data abstracted included demographics, provider notes, operative reports, pathology findings, outside medical records, peri-operative information, and reoperations.

RESULTS

From 2006 to 2020, 133 patients were identified, and 113 patients met study criteria with at least 6 months follow-up. The most common presenting symptoms were dyspareunia (77%) and pain (71%). The majority of VMR were performed vaginally (84.5%). Vaginal mesh was removed from anterior (60%), posterior (11%), and anterior and posterior (10%) compartments. Two ureteral injuries and one rectal injury were repaired intraoperatively. VMR resulted in resolution of pain in 50% of patients. Some patients had persistent pain (21%) and a few developed de novo pain (4%). More than half of the patients had dyspareunia resolution (52%), but 12% had persistent dyspareunia and 2% developed de novo dyspareunia.

CONCLUSIONS

VMR complexity requires advanced surgical expertise. Most patients undergoing VMR had resolution of their presenting symptoms. However, outcomes for pain, sexual function, continence, and/or prolapse can be unpredictable, resulting in multiple surgeries.

Comparison of transvaginal mesh surgery and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse

Background

Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is greatly affecting the quality of life (QOL) of women. There are some surgical techniques for POP repair, for example, transvaginal mesh surgery (TVM), laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC), and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy (RSC). In the United States and Europe, the number of TVM has rapidly decreased since 2011 due to complications and safety concerns and has shifted to LSC/RSC. In Japan, RSC has increased after the insurance coverage of RSC in 2020. Therefore, we compared the surgical outcomes of TVM and RSC in POP surgery.

Methods

We retrospectively collected POP surgery underwent TVM or RSC at our hospital and compared the operative time, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, and preoperative and postoperative stress urinary incontinence (SUI) of two groups. Preoperative and postoperative SUI were classified into 3 groups: “improved preoperative SUI”, “persistent preoperative SUI” and “de novo SUI”, which occurred for the first time in patients with no preoperative SUI, and compared incidence rate. The Mann–Whitney U test and Fisher’s exact test were used to compare the two groups, and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

From August 2011 to July 2021, 76 POP surgery was performed and they were classified into two groups: TVM group (n = 39) and RSC group (n = 37). There was no difference in patient age and BMI between the TVM and RSC groups. The median of operative time was 78.0 vs. 111.0 min (p = 0.06), blood loss was 20.0 ml vs. 5.0 ml (p < 0.05), and postoperative hospital stay was 4.0 days vs. 3.0 days (p < 0.05), with less blood loss and shorter postoperative hospital stay in the RSC group. There was no difference in postoperative complications between the TVM and RSC groups (17.9% vs. 16.2%, p = 1.00). De novo SUI was 25.6% vs. 5.4% (p < 0.05) in the TVM and RSC groups, of which 23.1% vs. 5.4% (p < 0.05) occurred within 3 months of surgery.

Conclusion

RSC is more beneficial and less invasive for patients with pelvic organ prolapse than TVM. In addition, de novo SUI as postoperative complication of RSC was lower than of TVM.

Early Experience of Transabdominal and Novel Transvaginal Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Removal of Transvaginal Mesh

Background: Mesh removal after transvaginal mesh placement has typically involved transvaginal, open pelvic, laparoscopic, or a combination of approaches. Robotic pelvic mesh removal has been described in a small number of cases only. This study aims at determining the feasibility and safety of using robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery in the removal of pelvic mesh via the transabdominal and novel transvaginal approach. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective case series study on women who underwent transabdominal or transvaginal robot-assisted removal of pelvic mesh. Women were offered participation in this study with pelvic mesh and a clinical indication for mesh removal if they were older than the age of 18. Alternative surgical options, including conventional open removal of mesh, were discussed and offered to patients. The primary outcome of this study is the rate of successful removal of mesh and the 30-day complication rates. Ethics approval was obtained for this study. Results: Thirty patients were included in this study. Median age was 62. Median operative and console time was 240 and 148 minutes, respectively. Concomitant reconstructive procedures were performed in 40% of patients. Complete or near-complete mesh removal was achieved in 83.3% of patients. For the remaining patients, partial removal of mesh was performed as planned preoperatively. Three Clavien-Dindo grade 3b complications resulted from mesh removal: concomitant ureteric and bladder injury, omental bleed, and groin wound infection. Conclusion: This study presents the early experience of robotic-assisted removal of transvaginal mesh with a transvaginal or transabdominal approach and demonstrates the feasibility of removal of both retropubic and transobturator mid-urethral synthetic sling as well as transvaginal prolapse meshes with transobturator and sacrospinous mesh arms. Further studies are required to expand understanding on the learning curve, operating times, complication rates, and functional outcome of this operation.

Is it worthwhile to perform closure of the pelvic peritoneum in laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal resection?

PURPOSE

There is no uniformity in the use of closure of the pelvic peritoneum (CPP) after laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE). This study aimed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of CPP after ELAPE and provide supporting evidence for the performance of CPP in laparoscopic ELAPE.

METHODS

Patients with rectal cancer who underwent ELAPE from January 2014 to April 2019 were retrospectively investigated. CPP was routinely performed unless it was not feasible. The main outcome was the difference in the occurrence of perineal hernia (PH), small bowel obstruction (SBO) and perineal wound complications between laparoscopic and open ELAPE, which were compared using Kaplan-Meier curves.

RESULTS

Of the 244 patients included, 104 received laparoscopic ELAPE, and 140 received open ELAPE. Patients in the laparoscopic group suffered a higher incidence of PH (11.5% (12/104) vs. 5.0% (7/140), p = 0.049), SBO (10.6% (11/104) vs. 7.9% (11/140), p = 0.433) and major perineal wound complications (12.5% (13/104) vs. 7.9% (11/140), p = 0.228) than those in the open group. Multivariate analysis showed that no-CPP was an independent risk factor for the occurrence of PH (p = 0.022, OR 3.436, 95% CI 1.199-9.848) and major perineal wound complications (p = 0.012, OR 3.683, 95% CI 1.337-10.146).

CONCLUSION

In this comparative cohort study with a risk of allocation bias, CPP was associated with a lower incidence of radiological PH and major perineal wound complications regardless of the surgical approach. Thus, we believe CPP could serve as an option L-ELAPE for the prevention of perineal complications. To further determine the impact of CPP on postoperative complications after ELAPE, a prospective multicentre study is needed.

Improvement in dyspareunia after vaginal mesh removal measured by a validated questionnaire

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

The objective was to examine the effect of the surgical removal of vaginally placed prolapse and incontinence mesh on sexual function. We hypothesize that patients with painful complications of mesh will experience improvement in dyspareunia and sexual function after mesh removal.

METHODS

The eligible cohort consisted of 133 women who presented with a new onset of pain attributed to mesh-augmented incontinence or prolapse surgery and who elected to undergo mesh removal between 1 August 2012 and 1 July 2013. Sexual function symptoms were assessed before and after mesh removal surgery using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire short form (PISQ-12). Multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors of improvement in dyspareunia.

RESULTS

Ninety-four patients undergoing mesh removal completed a pre-operative questionnaire, 63 of whom also completed a post-operative questionnaire. After mesh removal, there was a nearly 50% reduction in the proportion of women reporting always experiencing post-operative pain with intercourse among those experiencing pre-operative pain. There was a statistically significant quantitative improvement in pain with intercourse after mesh removal based on mean change score of PISQ-12 question 5 "How often do you experience pain with intercourse?". In multivariate analysis, only history of vaginal delivery was associated with symptom improvement.

CONCLUSION

Removal of transvaginal prolapse mesh is associated with improvement in self-reported dyspareunia based on a standardized question on a validated instrument in a small cohort of women. Although larger studies are needed to confirm the relationship between mesh-augmented surgeries and post-procedural dyspareunia, these data suggest that consideration of mesh removal is a reasonable step for patients with painful intercourse attributed to mesh-augmented prolapse and incontinence surgeries.

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.

Outcomes of a fixed skeletonised mini mesh implant for pelvic organ prolapse repair with uterine preservation

Mesh repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is complicated, causing erosions, postoperative pain and surgical failure. We hypothesised that reducing the mesh size and fixating it would result in significant cure rates and reduce complication rates. Here, we present the effectiveness of mini mesh implants in POP reconstruction. Sixty women who underwent repair of stage III and IV apical prolapse with cystocele or rectocele using skeletonised mesh implant Seratom PA MR MN® were evaluated. Anatomical outcomes were assessed using modified POP-quantification (POP-Q) staging and functional outcomes were self-reported by patients - one and three months post-operatively. Apical support with anterior and/or posterior colporrhaphy was performed, resulting in 96.6% success rate. Follow-up conducted one and three months post-operatively revealed significant improvement on the modified POP-Q (p < .001) and no complaints of dyspareunia. Para-vesicular fixation using a skeletonised mini mesh implant is feasible and effective in POP repair and has low surgical complication risk.Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? Mesh repair for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is currently under scrutiny as it may result in erosions, postoperative pain, and surgical failure.What do the results of this study add? The use of an apical support with mini-mesh implants resulted in a 96.6% (58/60) success rate and excellent outcomes at 1- and 3-month follow-up.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Reconstruction using skeletonised and fixated mini-mesh implants may be safe and effective for POP treatment.

Current situation of complications related to reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse: a multicenter study

Introduction and hypothesis

This study aimed to investigate the evaluation and management of complications after pelvic floor reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse in China.

Methods

Complications of pelvic floor reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapses from 27 institutions were reported from November 2017 to October 2019. All complications were coded according to the category-time-site system proposed by the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) and the International Continence Society (ICS). The severity of the complications was graded by the Clavien-Dindo grading system. Four scales were used to evaluate patient satisfaction and quality of life after management of the complications: the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire Short Form (PFIQ-7), the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score (POP-SS), and a 5-point Likert-type scale that evaluated the patient’s choice of surgery.

Results

Totally, 256 cases were reported. The occurrence of complications related to transvaginal mesh (TVM) and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) had a significantly longer post-surgery delay than those of native tissue repair surgery (p < 0.001 and p = 0.010, respectively). Both PFIQ-7 and POP-SS score were lower after management of complications (p < 0.001). Most respondents (81.67%) selected very much better, much better, or a little better on the PGI-I scale. Only 13.3% respondents selected unlikely or highly unlikely on the 5-point Likert-type scale.

Conclusions

The occurrence of complications related to TVM surgery and LSC had a longer post-surgery delay than native tissue repair surgery. Long-term regular follow-up was vital in complication management. Patient satisfaction with the management of TVM complications was acceptable.

Immunochemical and urodynamic outcomes after polypropylene mesh explant from the pelvic wall of rats

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

To analyze the immunochemical and urodynamic outcomes after partial versus complete excision of transvaginal polypropylene mesh (PPM) from pelvic walls of rats.

METHODS

Forty-eight female Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats were randomly distributed into seven groups: control, mesh total removal 60 days (M-T 60D), mesh total removal 180 days (M-T 180D), mesh partial removal 60 days (M-H 60D), mesh partial removal 180 days (M-H 180D), sham 60 days (Sham 60D), and sham 180 days (Sham 180D). In the mesh groups, PPM was inserted and partially (0.3 × 0.3 cm) or completely removed 30 days later. In the Sham group, the space between the vagina and bladder was dissected without placing or removing the synthetic mesh at day 1 and day 30 later. Urodynamic studies, immunochemical analysis, and Western blot were done at days 60 and 180.

RESULTS

The M-T 60D voiding pressure was significantly decreased compared to the Sham 60D and M-H 60D. The voiding interval of M-T 60D was significantly shorter than that of M-H 60D. In the M-T 60D and M-T 180D groups, the leak point pressure was significantly less than in their corresponding sham groups. IL-1 and TNF-α were significantly more intense in M-T 60D compared to M-H 60D and Sham 60D. NGF was significantly greater in M-T 60D compared to Sham 60D. There were no significant differences in MMP-2 and CD-31s throughout the group.

CONCLUSION

Total mesh excision incites a host inflammatory response and transitory lower urinary tract dysfunction. Despite the good outcomes after total excision, the invasiveness and surgical risk associated with repeated procedures should not be underestimateded.

Women with advanced pelvic organ prolapse and levator ani muscle avulsion would significantly benefit from mesh repair surgery

OBJECTIVES

Mesh repair surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) has been suspended in some countries owing to concerns about its associated complications. However, mesh repair has been shown to reduce the risk of prolapse recurrence after surgery. In view of this controversy, our aim was to assess the incidence of subjective and objective recurrence of POP following mesh repair surgery vs native-tissue repair in women with Stage-III or Stage-IV POP.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study of women who presented with Stage-III or Stage-IV POP and received primary prolapse surgery between 2013 and 2018. Transperineal ultrasound was performed before the operation and volumes were analyzed offline to assess the presence of levator ani muscle (LAM) avulsion. All women were counseled on either mesh repair or native-tissue reconstruction. The mesh-repair group was followed up for up to 5 years and the native-tissue-repair group for up to 2 years after the operation. Prolapse symptoms and POP quantification (POP-Q) staging were assessed at follow-up. Subjective recurrence of POP was defined as symptoms of prolapse (vaginal bulge sensation or dragging sensation) reported by the patient. Objective recurrence was defined as POP-Q ≥ Stage II. The subjective and objective recurrences of prolapse were compared between women with and those without mesh use. Multivariate regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for the recurrence of POP.

RESULTS

A total of 154 Chinese women with Stage-III or Stage-IV prolapse were recruited. Of these, 104 (67.5%) underwent mesh repair (transabdominal in 57 women and transvaginal in 47 women) and 50 (32.5%) had native-tissue repair surgery. Ninety-five (61.7%) women had LAM avulsion. Both the subjective POP recurrence rate (4.8% vs 20.0%; P = 0.003) and the objective recurrence rate (20.2% vs 46.0%; P = 0.001) were significantly lower in the mesh-repair group than in the native-tissue-repair group. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, mesh repair was associated significantly with a reduced risk of subjective recurrence (odds ratio (OR), 0.20 (95% CI, 0.07-0.63)) and of objective recurrence (OR, 0.16 (95% CI, 0.07-0.55)) of prolapse. On subgroup analysis of women with LAM avulsion, mesh repair significantly reduced the risk of subjective recurrence (OR, 0.24 (95% CI, 0.07-0.87)) and objective recurrence (OR, 0.23 (95% CI, 0.09-0.57)) of POP. The incidence of mesh-related complications was low, and mesh exposure could be treated conservatively or by minor surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Mesh repair surgery, compared with native-tissue repair, was associated with a 5-fold reduction in the risk of subjective recurrence and a 6-fold reduction in the risk of objective recurrence of prolapse in women with Stage-III or Stage-IV POP. In women with concomitant LAM avulsion, mesh repair surgery was associated with a 4-fold reduction in both objective and subjective recurrence of POP. The rate of mesh-related complications was low, and mesh exposure could be treated conservatively or by minor surgery. The benefit of mesh surgery for these high-risk women appears to outweigh the risks of mesh complications, and it could be a treatment option for this group of women. © 2020 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Management of Vaginal Mesh Exposures Following Female Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss considerations and current evidence for the diagnosis and management of vaginal mesh exposures following female mesh-augmented anti-incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Since the introduction of mesh into female pelvic surgery, various applications have been reported, each with their own unique risk profile. The most commonly encountered mesh-related complication is vaginal mesh exposure. Current evidence on the management of vaginal mesh exposure is largely limited to observational studies and case series, though this is continuing to expand. We present a synthesis of the available data, as well as clinical and surgical approaches to managing this complication. It is important for surgeons to be familiar with the management of vaginal mesh exposures. Depending on the patient's presentation and goals, there is a role for conservative measures, mesh revision, or mesh excision. Further study is warranted to standardize mesh resection techniques and explore non-surgical treatments.

Complications of synthetic mesh inserted for stress urinary incontinence

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update on the literature regarding the management of complications secondary to synthetic mesh placed to treat stress urinary incontinence (SUI).

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature using a multi-database structured search within OVID, the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), the Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE) and Cochrane library databases; using the keywords: urology, incontinence, mesh and surgery.

RESULTS

Several million synthetic polypropylene meshes have been inserted into women worldwide to manage SUI. Unfortunately, a significant number of women have now reported life-changing complications. We found a paucity of studies, heterogeneity of cohorts, poor long-term follow-up, and lack of evidence on the effective management of mesh-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The contemporary evidence is low-level and often contradictory, which prevents robust recommendations regarding treatment. A prospective registry will be required to generate meaningful outcome data and help in the complex management of patients who have mesh-related complications.

Efficacy of surgical revision of mesh complications in prolapse and urinary incontinence surgery

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Women with mesh-related complications in prolapse (POP) and stress-urinary incontinence (SUI) surgery may benefit from operative mesh resection to alleviate symptoms. We hypothesized that mesh resection would alleviate symptoms and aimed to evaluate risks and benefits in these women.

METHODS

We carried out a cross-sectional study. Primary outcome was improvement specified as better, unchanged or worsened symptoms after mesh revision surgery. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life (HrQol) scores of validated questionnaires, surgical characteristics and physical findings at follow-up visits. Descriptive data were reported with mean and medians. Associations were calculated with Spearman correlation coefficient and chi-square test to determine statistical differences between groups.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine women who underwent mesh revision surgery between 2009 and 2016 were included. After a median follow-up of 1.7 (IQR: 1.1-2.4) years, 44 women (75%) reported improvement of symptoms. No significant surgical or patient characteristics were identified that could differentiate which patients did or did not experience cure or complications.A trend was observed to better HrQol scores in women who reported overall improvement after mesh revision surgery. Seventeen (29%) women needed a subsequent operation after mesh removal.

CONCLUSIONS

This cross-sectional study shows that mesh revision surgery alleviates symptoms in 75% of women with mesh-related complications. Type of revision surgery and individual characteristics did not seem to matter to the individual chance of cure or complications. These data can facilitate the counseling of women considering mesh revision surgery.

[Pelvic and perineal pain after genital prolapse: A literature review]

INTRODUCTION

Pelvic and perineal pain after genital prolapse surgery is a serious and frequent post-operative complication which diagnosis and therapeutic management can be complex.

MATERIALS ET METHODS

A literature review was carried out on the Pubmed database using the following words and MeSH : genital prolapse, pain, dyspareunia, genital prolapse and pain, genital prolapse and dyspareunia, genital prolapse and surgery, pain and surgery.

RESULTS

Among the 133 articles found, 74 were selected. Post-operative chronic pelvic pain persisting more than 3 months after surgery according to the International Association for the Study of Pain. It can be nociceptive, neuropathic or dysfunctional. Its diagnosis is mainly clinical. Its incidence is estimated between 1% and 50% and the risk factors are young age, the presence of comorbidities, history of prolapse surgery, severe prolapse, preoperative pain, invasive surgical approach, simultaneous placement of several meshes, less operator experience, increased operative time and early post-operative pain. The vaginal approach can cause a change in compliance and vaginal length as well as injury to the pudendal, sciatic and obturator nerves and in some cases lead to myofascial pelvic pain syndrome, whereas the laparoscopic approach can lead to parietal nerve damage. Therapeutic management is multidisciplinary and complex.

CONCLUSION

Pelvic pain after genital prolapse surgery is still obscure to this day.

Robotic-assisted repair of pelvic organ prolapse: a scoping review of the literature

The purpose of this article is to perform a scoping review of the medical literature regarding the efficacy, safety, and cost of robotic-assisted procedures for repair of pelvic organ prolapse in females. Sacrocolpopexy is the "gold standard" repair for apical prolapse for those who desire to maintain their sexual function, and minimally-invasive approaches offer similar efficacy with fewer risks than open techniques. The introduction of robotic technology has significantly impacted the field, converting what would have been a large number of open abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) procedures to a minimally-invasive approach in the United States. Newer techniques such as nerve-sparing dissection at the sacral promontory, use of the iliopectineal ligaments and natural orifice vaginal sacrocolpopexy may improve patient outcomes. Prolapse recurrence is consistently noted in at least 10% of patients regardless of route of mesh placement. Ancillary factors including pre-operative prolapse stage, retention of the cervix, type of mesh implant, and genital hiatus (GH) size all adversely affect surgical efficacy, while trainees do not. Minimally-invasive apical repair procedures are suited to early recovery after surgery protocols but may not be appropriate for all patients. Studies evaluating longer-term outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexies are needed to understand the relative risk/benefit ratio of this technique. With several emerging robotic platforms with improved features and a focus on decreasing costs, the future of robotics seems bright.

Pelvic peritoneum closure reduces postoperative complications of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection: 6-year experience in single center

BACKGROUND

To investigate feasibility of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection with pelvic peritoneum closure (LAPR-PPC) for lower rectal cancer.

METHODS

LAPR-PPC has been used for lower rectal cancer in our institution since 2014. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed the data from 86 patients who underwent LAPR-PPC and compared with the data from 96 patients who underwent laparoscopic APR without PPC (LAPR) from January 2013 to December 2018.

RESULTS

The rate of perineal surgical site infection (SSI) (18.75% (18/96) vs. 5.81% (5/86), p < 0.01), delayed (> 4 weeks) perineal healing (12.50% (12/96) vs. 3.49% (3/86), p = 0.027), ileus (7.29% (7/96) vs 1.16% (1/86), p = 0.044), and postoperative perineal hernia (PPH, 5.21% (5/96) vs. 0% (0/86), p = 0.032) were significantly lower in LAPR-PPC group than LAPR group. The patients in LAPR-PPC group had shorter hospitalization time (21.32 ± 11.95 days vs. 13.93 ± 11.51 days, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

PPC procedure enabled the reduction in perineal wound complications, ileus, PPH, and consequently shortened hospitalization time. LAPR-PPC is beneficial for the patients with lower rectal cancer.

Complications and reoperation after pelvic organ prolapse, impact of hysterectomy, surgical approach and surgeon experience

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

The surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is associated with specific complications. Our primary objective was to assess the recurrence requiring reoperation after prolapse surgery, and our secondary objectives were to assess the early complications and secondary surgery for urinary incontinence.

METHODS

Retrospective study of a population-based cohort of all hospital or outpatient stays including POP surgery from 2008 to 2014, using the French nationwide discharge summary database. We calculated the rates of hospital readmission following surgery as well as the rates of reoperation for recurrent prolapse and subsequent procedures performed for urinary incontinence.

RESULTS

A total of 310,938 patients had undergone surgery for POP. Two hundred fourteen (0.07%) patients died, and 0.45% were admitted to an intensive care unit; 4.4% of the patients underwent surgery for the recurrence of prolapse. Concomitant hysterectomy in the first surgery was associated with a significantly lower risk of POP surgery recurrence: (hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 0.51 [0.49; 0.53]). A total of 1386 (2.5%) patients were readmitted to the hospital for early (30-day) complications of prolapse surgery. The most frequent reasons for early readmission were local infection (32.8%), hemorrhage (21.4%) and pain (17.2%). Risk factors for complications were obesity, hospitals with low levels of activity and associated incontinence surgery; 4.6% of the patients required secondary surgery for urinary incontinence; obesity was a risk factor (HR [95% CI] = 1.12 [1.01; 1.24]), and the vaginal route was a protective factor (odds ratio = 1.86 for laparoscopy, 1.44 for laparotomy and 1.25 for multiple approaches).

CONCLUSIONS

POP surgery is associated with low rates of complication and recurrence. Complications occurred most commonly following combined surgeries for both prolapse and incontinence and in hospitals with low surgical volumes. Concomitant hysterectomy appears to be protective for the need for additional prolapse surgery, and the vaginal route leads to a lower frequency of secondary surgery for urinary incontinence.

Abnormal vaginal microbiome associated with vaginal mesh complications

Aims

To identify differences in the vaginal microbiomes of women after transvaginal mesh (TVM) surgery for pelvic organ prolapse with and without mesh‐associated complications.

Methods

Patients with complications were eligible as cases, patients without as controls. DNA was isolated and the V1‐2 region of the 16S ribosomal RNA gene was amplified and sequenced. Overall richness was quantified using Chao1. Overall diversity was expressed as Shannon diversity and screened for group differences using analysis of variance. Multivariate differences among groups were evaluated with functions from R.

Results

We recruited 14 patients after mesh exposure, 5 after contraction, and 21 as controls. The average number of operational taxonomic unit was 74.79 (SD ± 63.91) for controls, 57.13 (SD ± 58.74) after exposures, and 92.42 (SD ± 50.01) after contractions. Total 89.6% of bacteria in controls, 86.4% in previous exposures, and 81.3% in contractions were classified as either Firmicutes, Proteobacteria, or Actinobacteria (P < .001). Veillonella spp. was more abundant in patients after contraction (P = .045). The individual microbiomes varied, and we did not detect any significant differences in richness but a trend towards higher diversity with complications.

Conclusions

The presence of Veillonella spp. could be associated with mesh contraction. Our study did not identify vaginal microbiotic dysbiosis as a factor associated with exposure. Larger cohort studies would be needed to distinguish the vaginal microbiome of women predisposed to mesh‐related complications for targeted phenotyping of patients who could benefit from TVM surgery.

The autologous rectus fascia sheath sacrocolpopexy and sacrohysteropexy, a mesh free alternative in patients with recurrent uterine and vault prolapse: A contemporary series and literature review

Introduction:

About 40% of women suffer pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in a lifetime. The current standard intervention for vault prolapse is a mesh sacrocolpopexy or sacrohysteropexy. However, patients and surgeons are increasingly hesitant to use mesh given recent the UK and Food and Drug Administration warnings and litigation. A possible alternative is to use autologous tissue to support the vault, as a mesh-free solution. We report the outcomes from an initial series of autologous rectus fascia sheath (RFS) sacrocolpopexy and sacrohysteropexy in patients with complex pelvic floor dysfunction.

Patients and Methods:

All patients had previous, multiple urological/gynecological surgery and declined standard mesh repairs. All had preoperative videourodynamics and defecating magnetic resonance imaging evaluation. The autologous POP repair was performed using 10–18 cm of rectus sheath with a similar technique to that employing mesh to support the anterior-posterior vaginal walls or encircle the cervix and secured to the sacral promontory.

Results:

Seven patients with a mean age of 52 (33–64) years underwent autologous RFS POP repair between 2014 and 2017. Mean follow-up is 16 (range 2–33) months. All patients have durable result at last follow-up. No significant complications are reported.

Conclusions:

This is the first report of patients with complex pelvic floor dysfunction and apical POP being managed with autologous RFS sacrocolpopexy/sacrohysteropexy, and only the second report of a free graft being utilized with success. Autologous RFS sacrocolpopexy/sacrohysteropexy avoids the 10%–15% risks of mesh-related complications. Further studies of long-term durability are needed.

Does being performed by urologist or gynecologist affect the outcomes of women who have had sacrocolpopexy?

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of women who underwent abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) by urologist and gynecologist.

STUDY DESIGN

A total of 61 women underwent transabdominal sacrocolpopexy, with 31 by a urologist (Group 1) and 30 by a gynecologist (Group 2). The patients were presented with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The results were evaluated with Baden-Walker system and International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Short Form (ICIQ-SF) to assess anatomical and continence outcomes. Postoperative complications were documented based on the Dindo and Clavien Classification. Statistical analyses were done using Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher's exact test with SPSS version 21.0.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up time was 21.4 (12-36) and 21.8 (12-36) months for Group 1 and Group 2, respectively (p = 0.72). The mean estimated blood loss and length of hospitalization were similar in both groups. The success rates were; 93.5% for Group 1 and 93.3% for Group 2 (p = 0.89). There was no difference in complication rates between the two groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The fact that it was administered by gynocologist or urologist does not affect the outcomes of sacrocolpopexy surgery. Similar success and complication rates were found in the patients for both groups.

[LSC (LAPAROSCOPIC SACROCOLPOPEXY) VERSUS UPHOLD TYPE TVM: A CASE CONTROL STUDY]

(Objective) The comparative analysis of post-surgery condition of lower urinary tract symptoms of LSC and Uphold-type TVM. (Methods) Since August 2015, our hospital introduced LSC and launched Uphold-type TVM in May 2017. 25 cases were examined by December 2017. In comparison with 37 cases of LSC conducted simultaneously, OABSS, IPSS, ICIQ-SF as well as uroflowmetry and residual urine measurement were performed with focus on perioperative complications and postoperative (3 months) lower urinary tract symptoms. As can be observed from the patient background, the average age of subject patients were close to 77 years old for TVM group, 70 years old for LSC group. LSC group showed a tendency to be observed among younger patients. (Result) In Stage II of Pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) most of the mild cases (8 cases in TVM group and 3 cases in LSC group) existied. The type of pelvic organ prolapse (most protruding part) was bladder. Many cystoceles in the TVM group (15 cases in the TVM group and 10 cases in the LSC group) were observed. The average operation time was 115 minutes in the TVM group and 214 minutes in the LSC group which was longer. The average bleeding amount was 54 ml in the TVM group and 10 ml in the LSC group, which was quite small. For the intraoperative complication, in 2 cases bleeding volume 100 ml or more were observed in the TVM group. Bladder injury was found in 1 case. (Conclusion) Regarding postoperative complications, one case of vaginal erosion in TVM group, one case of port suture failure in LSC group, one case of de novo OAB were observed respectively. OABSS, total urinary urgency, IPSS, residual urine were improved in both groups. Both types of surgery are expected to improve lower urinary symptoms and considered to be a useful tool for treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.

Combined rectopexy and sacrocolpopexy is safe for correction of pelvic organ prolapse

PURPOSE

Pelvic floor abnormalities often affect multiple organs. The incidence of concomitant uterine/vaginal prolapse with rectal prolapse is at least 38%. For these patients, addition of sacrocolpopexy to rectopexy may be appropriate. Our aim was to determine if addition of sacrocolpopexy to rectopexy increases the procedural morbidity over rectopexy alone.

METHODS

We utilized the ACS-NSQIP database to examine female patients who underwent rectopexy from 2005 to 2014. We compared patients who had a combined procedure (sacrocolpopexy and rectopexy) to those who had rectopexy alone. Thirty-day morbidity was compared and a multivariable model constructed to determine predictors of complications.

RESULTS

Three thousand six hundred patients underwent rectopexy; 3394 had rectopexy alone while 206 underwent a combined procedure with the addition of sacrocolpopexy. Use of the combined procedure increased significantly from 2.6 to 7.7%. Overall morbidity did not differ between groups (14.8% rectopexy alone vs. 13.6% combined procedure, p = 0.65). Significant predictors of morbidity included addition of resection to a rectopexy procedure, elevated BMI, smoking, wound class, and ASA class. After controlling for these and other patient factors, the addition of sacrocolpopexy to rectopexy did not increase overall morbidity (OR 1.00, p = 0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no difference in operative morbidity when adding sacrocolpopexy to a rectopexy procedure. Despite a modest increase in utilization of combined procedures over time, the overall rate remains low. These findings support the practice of multidisciplinary evaluation of patients presenting with rectal prolapse, with the goal of offering concurrent surgical correction for all compartments affected by pelvic organ prolapse disorders.

Place of surgery in the management of post-operative chronic pain after placement of prosthetic material based on a series of 107 cases

AIMS

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of surgical removal of prosthetic material, possibly combined with nerve release, on chronic postoperative pain following placement of prosthetic material.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Single-tertiary-centre study on 107 patients managed between November 2004 and April 2016 for removal of prosthetic material responsible for postoperative chronic pain: retropubic suburethral sling (n = 32), transobturator suburethral sling (n = 50), prolapse mesh (n = 16), and hernia mesh (n = 9). The primary endpoint was at least 50% reduction of pain evaluated by a pain numerical rating scale (NRS).

RESULTS

The mean interval between the initial operation involving placement of prosthetic material and reoperation for removal of prosthetic material was 41.2 ± 35.4 months. In all cases pain apperaed immediately following prosthetic material placement surgery. Pain presented neuropathic features in almost 30% of cases and was poorly systematized in more than one-half The mean follow-up of the study population was 8.4 ± 10.3 months. The mean pain NRS score for the overall population was seven preoperatively and three at last follow-up. At least 50% reduction of the pain NRS score was observed 67% of cases at last follow-up. During follow-up, 45% of patients experienced relapse of the disorder for which the prosthetic material was initially placed with, in particular, a 62% recurrence rate of urinary incontinence after removal of transobturator suburethral tape.

CONCLUSION

Surgical removal of prosthetic material to treat chronic postoperative pain, achieved global improvement of pain in about two-thirds of cases, but with a risk of recurrence of the initial disorders.

Risk factors for surgical site infection after transvaginal mesh placement in a nationwide Japanese cohort

AIMS

We conducted a nationwide survey on perioperative management and antimicrobial prophylaxis of transvaginal mesh surgeries for pelvic organ prolapse in Japan to understand the practice and risk factors for surgical site infection (SSI).

METHODS

Health records of women undergoing tension-free vaginal mesh (TVM) surgeries from 2010 to 2012 were obtained from 135 medical centers belonging to the Japanese Society of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery. The questionnaire addressed hospital volume, perioperative management, and SSI. Risk factors for SSI were investigated by comparing cases with and without SSI.

RESULTS

The hospital volume among institutions varied from 0 to 248 per year (median 16.7). Preoperative hair removal, bowel preparation, and urine culture were routinely performed at 74 (55%), 66 (49%), and 24 (18%) hospitals, respectively. Prophylactic antimicrobials used were mostly first-generation (43%) or second-generation (42%) cephalosporin. SSI was reported in 86 of 9323 patients (0.92%). A multivariate analysis indicated lower hospital volume (odds ratio [OR], 0.995 [by 1-point increase]; P < 0.001), preoperative bowel preparation (OR, 2.08; P = 0.013), non-routine urine culture (OR, 3.00; P = 0.0006), and the use of antibiotics other than first-generation cephalosporin (OR, 5.29; P = 0.0011) as significant risk factors for SSI. In contrast, the cut-off points of hospital volume for preventing SSI was 116.7 cases (area under curve: 0.61).

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of SSI in TVM surgeries was 0.92% in Japan. Lower hospital volume, bowel preparation, non-routine preoperative urine culture, and prophylactic antibiotics other than first-generation cephalosporin significantly elevated the incidence of SSI.