Bone anchors in urogynecology

The perils of commercially driven surgical innovation

The practice of gynecological surgery is being reshaped by commercial interests that are promoting the use of trochar-and-mesh surgical kits for the treatment of stress incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. In this article, we review the recent history of these surgical innovations and discuss the implications of changes in surgical practice that are driven by commercial interests of this kind. We situate this phenomenon within the general "life cycle" of surgical innovation and point out the dangers inherent in the adoption of new procedures without adequate evidence to support their safety and efficacy. We highlight the ethical responsibilities surgeons and their professional organizations have in making sure such innovations are safe and effective before they come into widespread use. Finally, we offer some policy suggestions to ensure that this process has proper oversight.

Actinomyces meyeri osteomyelitis of the symphysis pubis following pubovaginal sling

Previous reports of pubic osteomyelitis associated with bone anchors describe symptoms presenting 10 days to 12 months postoperatively with typical pathogens including Streptococcus, Staphylococcus, Citrobacter, and Pseudomonas (Fitzgerald et al., Int Urogynecol J 10:346-348, 1999 Enzler et al., J Bone Jt Surg Am 81-A(12):1736-1740, 1999; Graham and Dmochowski, J Urol 168:2055-2058, 2004; Fialkow et al., Urology 64(6):1127-1132, 2004; Matkov et al., J Urol 160(4):1427, 1998). This case illustrates the potential for protracted symptoms and delayed diagnosis of pubic osteomyelitis with the fastidious pathogen of Actinomyces meyeri.