Utilisation de la colle chirurgicale dans la promontofixation laparoscopique. Étude comparative à propos de 32 cas

Glue mesh fixation in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: results at 3 years' follow-up

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

We assessed 3-year anatomic and functional results using synthetic glue to fix mesh in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.

METHODS

Prospective multicenter cohort study in three academic urogynecology departments. Seventy consecutive patients with stage ≥ 3 POP-Q (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification) anterior and/or apical prolapse underwent laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy using synthetic surgical glue to fix anterior and posterior meshes to the vagina. Patients were followed up at 1, 2 and 3 years. Primary outcome was anterior and apical anatomic success (POP-Q stage ≤ 1) at 3 years. Secondary outcomes comprised functional results (international quality of life and sexuality scales), mesh-related morbidity and urinary incontinence at 3 years.

RESULTS

Mean age was 56.7 ± 1.2 years. Mean follow-up was 43 months. Anterior compartment anatomic success rate was 87% at 2 years (Ba, -2.4 cm; p < 0.0001) and 86.5% at 3 years (Ba, -2.3 cm; p < 0.0001); apical success was 96.3% at 2 years (C, -6.8 cm; p < 0.0001) and 97.3% at 3 years (C, -6.5 cm; p < 0.0001). All quality-of-life scores improved significantly and lastingly at 3 years: PFDI-20, PFIQ-7 and PISQ-12, respectively, p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001 and p = 0.01. There was one case of vaginal mesh exposure at 3 years (2.8%) and five of mesh shrinkage at 1 year (7.8%), none at 2 years and two at 3 years (5.4%). Urinary incontinence rate was 29.7% at 1 year, 14.8% at 2 years and 11.1% at 3 years.

CONCLUSION

Vaginal mesh adhesive in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy remained effective at 3 years, with excellent tolerance and no specific complications. Anatomic and functional results were good and enduring in terms of both anterior and apical correction.

The use of one-piece U-shaped mesh and barbed sutures in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LS) is considered a safe and effective surgery for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse (POP), but it requires expertise in laparoscopic surgery. The complexity of the intervention is due to the requirements of intracorporeal sutures and the manipulation of the mesh inside the cavity, which may be cumbersome. The barbed sutures (BS) simplify intracorporeal suturing and do not require knotting. Additionally, one-piece U-mesh (OP-UM) may facilitate handling, stabilization and tension adjustment. We describe our LS surgical technique using both materials to assess its feasibility, safety and effectiveness in a prospective series of patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 7 patients with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse were included. Urogynecological history, classification of the pelvic organ prolapse according to Baden-Walker and the application of the Prolapse Quality of Life questionnaire were performed in all cases. The non-absorbable polypropylene OP-UM (Uplift ™) was used. The posterior side of the single sling is sutured to the elevator anus muscles with two non-absorbable stitches. Two strands of BS (V-Loc™), tied at their ends, were used to attach the mesh to the vagina in two lines of continuous sutures in opposite directions. Self-anchoring tackers were used for promontofixation and BS for peritoneal closure.

RESULTS

The median age was 60 years, the median time of the anterior branch mesh BS fixation was 23minutes (range 21,30 - 26,40min), intraoperative bleeding was minimal, and the median hospital stay was 3 days. No intraoperative complications were recorded, and no mesh erosions or recurrences were observed at a median follow-up of 14 months (range 3-25 months). All patients presented clinical improvement of the prolapse and were satisfied with surgery. We observed that the OP-UM self-stabilizes when it extends longitudinally into the abdominal cavity, reducing the need of the surgical assistant. The independent promontofixation of each part of the mesh (posterior and anterior) allows a more anatomical tension adjustment. Fixing the mesh to the vagina is fast and simple with our BS technique.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of OP-UM and BS during LS is feasible, safe, effective and could simplify this surgical technique.

Safety of Synthetic Glue Used for Laparoscopic Prolapse Treatment

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We detected mesh erosion and serious postoperative complications in 3 women after performing laparoscopic promontofixation (LPF) using glue for mesh fixation. Glue, largely used in hernia surgery repair, is proposed by some gynecologic surgeons because it saves time and is easier to use than traditional sutures. We report 3 cases of postoperative complications after LPF in which glue had been used and provide research in the published literature about the use of glue in LPF.

METHODS

A research of glue use in gynecology mesh fixation was performed through PubMed on October 2016. The search was done using the Medical Subject Heading terms "POP" & "Laparoscopy" & "surgical Mesh" and the word either "glue" or "adhesive. Only 2 articles were found: Willecocq et al [1] and Estrade et al [2]. Neither study focused on postoperative complications. In this publication, we accurately edited video surgeries with an instructive purpose.

SETTING

University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand, France.

CASE REPORTS

Patient A, a 65-year-old woman, complained of pelvic pain and vaginal discharge 1 month after LPF (polypropylene mesh and glue had been used). Wall mesh exposure and purulent discharge were noted. She received antibiotics and underwent mesh ablation surgery; debris of the glue was easily identified. Patient B, a 65-year-old lady with previous hysterectomy consulted for a bulging feeling in her vagina (classification: cystocele +2; rectocele +3 stage). An LPF was performed using polypropylene soft nonabsorbable mesh and glue. One month later, an apical defect of vaginal epithelialization was detected; she received long estrogenic local treatment but had to undergo surgery when presenting malodorous discharge and mesh exposure. The exposed mesh was removed, and pieces of glue were identified, having avoided mesh attachment. Patient C had a previous abdominal hysterectomy and promontofixation using a polyester mesh with glue. She consulted to us for vaginal mesh erosion covered with purulent discharge 3.5 years after LPF in another center. At the surgery, 1 cm of the prosthesis was identified in the vagina, dissected, and sutured. One year later, she consulted for dyspareunia and purulent discharge; vaginal rigid mesh exposure with an epithelization defect and inflammatory signs was seen. During laparoscopy, prosthetic exposition and glue debris on the prosthesis were identified.

DISCUSSION

In all 3 cases, debris of glue were identified in the no integrated mesh area. The suggested reasons of exposure can be the excessive amount of surgical glue applied. Moreover, a large amount of glue may be impairing tissue ingrowth through the mesh pores, causing low fibrosis and poor tissue integration [3].

CONCLUSION

Glue seems to prevent fibrosis from occurring. Its use in pelvic organ prolapse laparoscopic mesh fixation should be done with caution. No prospective studies reporting long-term comorbidities and results have been published.