Long-term outcomes of pelvic organ prolapse repair using a mesh-capturing device when comparing single- versus multicenter use

Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair Using Robotic-Assisted Sacral Hysterocolpopexy vs Vaginal Surgery with the Uphold™ System: 1-Year Clinical Outcomes

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

The aim of the study was to compare clinical outcomes when using robotic-assisted sacral hysterocolpopexy (RASC) and vaginal surgery using the Uphold™ Vaginal Support System mesh for pelvic organ prolapse repair.

METHODS

This was a nonrandomized, prospective, multicenter study in which 72 women underwent RASC, and 73 Uphold™ surgery, for apical prolapse (POP-Q C ≥ stage II). Anatomical outcomes were assessed using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) system. Subjective outcomes were evaluated using the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 (PFDI-20), the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire - short form (PFIQ-7), and the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12), as well as pain estimation using the visual analog scale (0-10).

RESULTS

One year after surgery, an optimal apical segment outcome (POP-Q C stage 0-1) was achieved in 96.4% and 93.3% for the RASC and Uphold™ respectively, p = 0.49. However, reoperation for prolapse recurrence was significantly more common after RASC (11 out of 72 [15.3%] vs Uphold™ (2 out of 71 [2.8%], p = 0.005), and an optimal outcome of the anterior vaginal wall was higher after Uphold™ (p < 0.001). Postoperative PFDI-20, PFIQ-7, and pain significantly improved for both RASC and Uphold™ (p = 0.004 to < 0.001), but a more pronounced improvement in the total PFDI-20 and POPDI-6 sub-scores was observed after Uphold™ than after RASC (-73 ± 55.6 vs -49.2 ± 43.7, p = 0.005 and -39.6 ± 23.6 vs -27 ± 23.9, p < 0.001 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Reoperation for prolapse recurrence within 1 year was more common after RASC than after Uphold™. However, the rate of complications was low overall and there were few and largely insignificant differences in outcomes when comparing RASC and Uphold™.

Polypropylene anterior-apical single-incision UPHOLD-LITE mesh surgery in women with severe pelvic organ prolapse: Outcome at 53 months follow up

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

We present this current study to complement with mesh inlays plausible benefits (UPHOLD-LITE System) on available long-term study amidst FDA's concern on mesh complications. This study aims to assess the medium-term outcomes of UPHOLD-LITE system for treatment of advanced pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and its complications, and lower urinary tract symptoms.

METHODS

This is a retrospective case series of 53 months follow-up of 123 consecutive patients who underwent UPHOLD-LITE system. Objective outcome measures the anatomical correction of prolapse with POP-Q ≤ Stage 1. Subjective outcome was patient's feedback to questions 2 and 3 of POPDI-6. Secondary outcome measures the quality of life, presence of lower urinary tract symptoms and complications. Quality of life is assessed by validated questionnaires on Urogenital Distress Inventory 6 (UDI-6), Incontinence Impact Questionnaire 7 (IIQ-7), Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory 6 (POPDI-6), and Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire 12 (PISQ-12) at 1 and 3 years post-operatively.

RESULTS

Objective outcome at 1 and 3 years was at 96.7 % and 95.4 % respectively. The subjective cure was 95.1 % and 91.6 %. Five-year cumulative cure rate maintained at 87.2 %. Secondary outcomes observed improvement on UDI-6, IIQ-7, POPDI-6 and PISQ-12 postoperatively. Bladder outlet obstruction improved while de novo urodynamic stress incontinence (USI) increased slightly post surgically. Mesh erosion rate was 0.8 %.

CONCLUSION

The UPHOLD-LITE system demonstrated good medium term anatomical correction of apical and anterior prolapse, with good subjective cure and improved quality of life. Whilst complication rate was low, slight increase in de novo USI was observed.

Quality-of-life improvements in patients after various surgical treatments for pelvic organ prolapse

OBJECTIVE

To compare the improvements in quality of life of patients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) treated using various surgical methods.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The PUBMED, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library online databases were searched using the keywords "pelvic organ prolapse", "surgery", "PFDI-20" and "PFIQ-7" for articles published from January 2010 to December 2022 that included quality-of-life scores before and after surgery.

RESULTS

Forty-nine articles were include. The mean postoperative PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 scores decreased by 67.50% and 76.98%, respectively, compared with those before surgery. In 76.9% of patients, this change did not decrease with increased postoperative time. The improvement rate in PFDI-20 scores after colpocleisis did not differ statistically from that after sacrocolpopexy and was significantly higher than that after other procedures. The improvement rate in PFIQ-7 scores after colpocleisis did not statistically differ from that after high uterosacral ligament suspension and was significantly higher than that after other procedures. The improvement rate in PFDI-20 scores after transvaginal mesh-based repair (TVM) did not significantly differ from that after sacrospinous ligament fixation and was significantly lower than that after other procedures except traditional vaginal wall repair. The improvement rate in PFIQ-7 scores after TVM did not significantly differ from that after new procedures and was significantly lower than that after other procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical treatment can significantly improve the quality of life of patients with POP. Colpocleisis may offer more advantages than those of other surgical procedures, and improvement was lower after TVM than after other procedures.

Path-related pain after implantation of anterior transvaginal mesh: perspective from anatomical study

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common gynecological disease caused by defects in pelvic support tissue that manifests as the descent of the pelvic organs, significantly impacting patient quality of life. Transvaginal mesh (TVM) is an effective treatment (Grade A). However, postoperative pain in the groin and medial thigh is very common. Although the use of mesh for transvaginal POP repair has been prohibited or the indications for such use have been extensively limited in many places, it is still an alternative in some countries. Therefore, the safety of the use of mesh still needs to be discussed. The current research on postoperative pain has mainly focused on management. The pathophysiology is unclear.

METHODS

In this study, anterior TVM surgery was performed on ten frozen cadavers. The obturator area was carefully dissected. We explored the relative position of the polypropylene mesh to the internal segment of the obturator nerve in the obturator canal.

RESULTS

Four out of 20 obturator explorations were insufficient to allow conclusions to be drawn. We observed a small branch of the obturator nerve, which is a new anatomical finding that we named the obturator externus muscle branch. This structure terminated in the external obturator muscle in 6 out of the 16 successfully dissected obturator areas. The mean distance between the superficial mesh arm and this nerve branch was 7.5 mm. The mean distance between the deep mesh arm and the closest nerve branch was 5.5 mm.

CONCLUSION

The path of the obturator externus muscle branch of the obturator nerve ran close to the mesh arm. It may provide a clinical anatomical basis explaining the observed postoperative pain.

Ultrasound evaluation of anterior transvaginal mesh for pelvic organ prolapse: correlation to 5-year clinical outcomes

Introduction and hypothesis

Vaginal prolapse mesh may effectively restore vaginal anatomy. The aim of this study was to investigate how the in vivo mesh position correlates to clinical outcomes.

Methods

Seventy-one women operated on using Uphold mesh for apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP-Q, C ≥ stage II) were examined 5 years after surgery by introital-perineal 2D ultrasound in a midsagittal plane at rest and Valsalva. The horizontal line and pubis symphysis were considered the reference for all measures. Ultrasound measures were statistically compared to clinical outcomes: POP-Q, Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and subscales [Pelvic Organ Distress Inventory (PODI-6), and Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI-6)] and the VAS scale for pain.

Results

Original mesh length was preserved by 86% and correlated to improved pain as estimated by VAS scale (r 0.321). Valsalva was associated with a lowering of the superior and inferior mesh margins by 7.3 and 6.1 mm, respectively (p < 0.001) but a reduction of total mesh length by only 1 mm (30.2 ± 5.2 to 29.2 ± 4.7 mm, p < 0.001). Mobility of the anterior vaginal wall (bladder neck and midurethra) at Valsalva was parallel to downward movement of the mesh inferior margin (r 0.346 and 0.314) but inversely correlated to total UDI-6 (r − 0.254 and − 0.263). Mobility of the midurethra was inversely correlated to bladder emptying (PFDI-20 Question 19, r − 0.245).

Conclusions

Five years after surgery, preserved original length of the mesh with apical support was correlated to improved anatomical and patient-reported outcomes. Mesh support to the vaginal apex was associated with improved bladder emptying and total urinary distress outcomes but not stress urinary incontinence.

Association between surgical volumes and real-world healthcare cost when using a mesh capturing device for pelvic organ prolapse: A 5-years comparison between single- versus multicenter use

Introduction and hypothesis

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether high surgical volume at a single center was associated with lower healthcare costs compared to lower surgical volume in a multicenter setting.

Methods

All patients had symptomatic and anatomical apical prolapse (POP-Q ≥ stage II) with or without cystocele and were operated on by a standard surgical procedure using the Uphold mesh. Data on time of resource use in terms of surgery time, hospital stay and re-interventions across 5 years were compared between the single center (97 patients) and multicenter (173 patients, at 24 clinics). Unit costs for surgical time, inpatient and outpatient visits were extracted from the single-center hospital’s operation analysis program and prime production cost. Total costs were estimated for primary surgery and during 5-year follow-up.

Results

Costs for primary surgery were comparable between the single and the multicenter ($13,561 ± 2688 and $13,867 ± 1177, P = 0.29). Follow-up costs 5 years after primary surgery were 2.8 times higher at the multicenter than single center ($3262 vs. $1149, P < 0.001). Mean cost per patient over 5 years was significantly lower at the single than multicenter [$14,710 (CI: 14,168–15,252) vs. $17,128 (CI: 16,952–17,305), P < 0.001)].

Conclusions

Using a mesh kit for apical pelvic organ prolapse in a high surgical volume center was associated with reduced healthcare costs compared with a lower volume multiple-site setting. The cost reduction at the high surgical volume center increased over time because of lower surgical and medical re-intervention rates for postoperative complications and recurrence.