Joint Position Statement on the Management of Mesh-Related Complications for the FPMRS Specialist

Quality of life outcomes after transobturator tape full removal surgeries: A monocentric experience

Objective

The objective of this study is to describe a standardised technique of full TOT removal with groin dissection and to report clinical improvement, satisfaction, safety and long-term functional, quality of life (QoL) and sexual QoL outcomes.

Materials and methods

A retrospective review enrolling all women who had full TOT removal, in a tertiary referral centre from May 2017 to November 2020. Functional outcomes, satisfaction and QoL were assessed using a bespoke composite questionnaire (UDI-6, EQ-5D-5L and ICIQ-S) with additional questions on sexual QoL. Secondary outcomes were post-operative recurrent stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and complication rate according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

Results

Full TOT removal using a vaginal approach and bilateral groin/para-labial incisions was performed in 67 patients. Chronic pelvic pain was the main indication for mesh removal (51% of cases, n = 34). QoL questionnaires were answered by 43 patients. The satisfaction rate was high 86% (n = 37), and 81% (n = 35) of the patients considered the surgery successful. Seventy per cent (n = 30) of patients returned to having a sexual life after surgery. Recurrent SUI was reported in 32% (n = 14) of cases. The complication rate was 10% (7/67), all of them Clavien-Dindo ≤2.

Conclusion

Despite a high rate of postoperative bothersome SUI, full TOT removal with bilateral groin dissection improves pain and QoL. It is associated with a high overall satisfaction rate and an acceptable rate of complications.

Robotic sacrocolpopexy

Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common cause of gynecological disease in elderly women. The prevalence of POP has increased with an aging society. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) is safer and more effective than the vaginal approach in patients with apical compartment POP because it has a higher anatomical cure rate, a lower recurrence rate, less dyspareunia, and improved sexual function. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) has replaced ASC. Robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) also helps overcome the challenges of LSC by facilitating deep pelvic dissection and multiple intracorporeal suturing. The RSC is technically easy to apply, has a steep learning curve, and offers many advantages over the LSC. However, insufficient data led us to conclude that the LSC is superior overall, especially in terms of costeffectiveness. The present review provides insights into different aspects of RSC, highlighting the most common benefits and concerns of this procedure. We searched for eligible articles discussing this issue from January 2019 to March 2022 to reveal the outcomes of RSC.

Dysregulated wound healing in the pathogenesis of urogynecologic mesh complications

To test the hypothesis that dysregulated wound healing is associated with Urogynecologic mesh complications, we collected vaginal cell secretions using vaginal swabs after polypropylene mesh implantation in patients with (N = 39) and without (N = 40) complication. A customized multiplex immunoassay measured markers of inflammation (MCP-1, IGFBP-1, IL-2, IL-10, IL-17, PDGF-BB, bFGF, IL-1b, IL-6, IL-12p70, TNF-α), neuroinflammation (IL-1RA, TGF-β, IL-15, IL-18, IL-3, M-CSF), angiogenesis (VEGF), and matrix proteins (fibronectin, tenasin c, thrombospondin-2, lumican) between groups. Patients with complications were younger, heavier, implanted with mesh longer, and more likely to be ever smokers. A 5 kg/m2 BMI increase and ever-smoking were associated with a 2.4-fold and sixfold increased risk of complication, respectively. Patients with the highest tertile of bFGF, fibronectin, thrombospondin-2, TNF-β, or VEGF had an odds ratio (OR) of 11.8 for having a mesh complication while ≥ 3 elevated had an OR of 237 while controlling for age, BMI, and smoking. The highest tertile of bFGF, thrombospondin-2, and fibronectin together perfectly indicated a complication (P < 0.0001). A receiver-operator curve for high bFGF, thrombospondin-2, and fibronectin showed excellent discrimination between complications and controls (AUC 0.87). These data provide evidence of dysregulated wound healing in mesh complications. Modifiable factors provide potential targets for patient counseling and interventions.

Transvaginal Mesh Compared With Native Tissue Repair for Pelvic Organ Prolapse

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and effectiveness of transvaginal mesh repair and native tissue repair, in response to a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 522 study order to assess co-primary endpoints of superiority and noninferiority.

METHODS

This was a prospective, nonrandomized, parallel cohort, multi-center trial comparing transvaginal mesh with native tissue repair for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. The primary endpoints were composite treatment success at 36 months comprised of anatomical success (defined as pelvic organ prolapse quantification [POP-Q] point Ba≤0 and/or C≤0), subjective success (vaginal bulging per the PFDI-20 [Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory]), and retreatment measures, as well as rates of serious device-related or serious procedure-related adverse events. Secondary endpoints included a composite outcome similar to the primary composite outcome but with anatomical success defined as POP-Q point Ba<0 and/or C<0, quality-of-life measures, mesh exposure and mesh- and procedure-related complications. Propensity score stratification was applied.

RESULTS

Primary endpoint composite success at 36 months was 89.3% (201/225) for transvaginal mesh and 80.2% (389/485) for native tissue repair, demonstrating noninferiority at the preset margin of 12% (propensity score-adjusted treatment difference 6.5%, 90% CI -0.2% to 13.2%). Using the primary composite endpoint, transvaginal mesh was not superior to native tissue repair (P=.056). Using the secondary composite endpoint, superiority of transvaginal mesh over native tissue repair was noted (P=.009), with a propensity score-adjusted difference of 10.6% (90% CI 3.3-17.9%) in favor of transvaginal mesh. Subjective success for both the primary and secondary endpoint was 92.4% for transvaginal mesh, 92.8% for native tissue repair, a propensity score-adjusted difference of -4.3% (CI -12.3% to 3.8%). For the primary safety endpoint, 3.1% (7/225) of patients in the transvaginal mesh (TVM) group and 2.7% (13/485) of patients in the native tissue repair (NTR) group developed serious adverse events, demonstrating that transvaginal mesh was noninferior to native tissue repair (-0.4%, 90% CI -2.7% to 1.9%). Overall device-related and/or procedure-related adverse event rates were 35.1% (79/225) in the TVM group and 46.4% (225/485) in the NTR group (-15.7%, 95% CI -24.0% to -7.5%).

CONCLUSION

Transvaginal mesh repair for the treatment of anterior and/or apical vaginal prolapse was not superior to native tissue repair at 36 months. Subjective success, an important consideration from the patient-experience perspective, was high and not statistically different between groups. Transvaginal mesh repair was as safe as native tissue repair with respect to serious device-related and/or serious procedure-related adverse events.

FUNDING SOURCE

This study was sponsored by Boston Scientific and developed in collaboration with FDA personnel from the Office of Surveillance and Biometrics, Division of Epidemiology.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01917968.

Surgical Removal of Midurethral Sling in Women Undergoing Surgery for Presumed Mesh-Related Complications: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether some, or all, of the mesh needs to be removed when a midurethral sling is removed for complications.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. MEDLINE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from January 1, 1996, through May 1, 2021, were searched for articles that met the eligibility criteria with total, partial, or a combination of anti-incontinence mesh removal.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

All study designs were included (N≥10), and a priori criteria were used for acceptance standards. Studies were extracted for demographics, operative outcomes, and adverse events. Meta-analysis was performed when possible.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

We double-screened 11,887 abstracts; 45 eligible and unique studies were identified. Thirty-five were single-group studies that evaluated partial mesh removal, five were single-group studies that evaluated total mesh removal, and five were studies that compared partial mesh removal with total mesh removal. All of the studies were retrospective in nature; there were no randomized controlled studies. Comparative studies demonstrated that partial mesh removal had lower rates of postoperative stress urinary incontinence (SUI) than total mesh removal (odds ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.22-0.96). Single-group studies supported lower rates of postoperative SUI with partial mesh removal compared with total mesh removal (19.2% [95% CI 13.5-25.7] vs 48.7% [95% CI 31.2-66.4]). Both methods were similar with respect to associated pain, bladder outlet obstruction, mesh erosion or exposure, and lower urinary tract symptoms. Adverse events were infrequent.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative SUI may be lower with partial mesh removal compared with total mesh removal. Other outcomes were similar regardless of the amount of mesh removed.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD 42018093099.

Symptomatic improvement after mesh removal: a prospective longitudinal study of women with urogynaecological mesh complications

OBJECTIVE

To compare clinical characteristics and outcomes in patients undergoing excision of polypropylene urogynaecological mesh for pain, mesh exposure or both.

DESIGN

Prospective, longitudinal cohort.

SETTING

Academic tertiary referral centre.

POPULATION

Women undergoing complete vaginal mesh excision for mesh exposure and/or pain.

METHODS

Clinical and patient-reported outcomes assessing pain (visual analog scale, VAS), bother (Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory, PFDI) and functional impact (Pelvic Functional Impact Questionnaire, PFIQ) were collected at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months after complete mesh excision. Outcomes were compared by mesh type (sling, prolapse [transvaginal or sacrocolpopexy mesh], both) and complication (pain, exposure, both).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

'Much better' or 'Very much better' on Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) up to 2 years after removal.

RESULTS

Of 173 women, 48 underwent removal for pain, 27 for exposure and 98 for exposure plus pain. 'Moderate to severe' baseline symptoms were reported by 75%; the most prevalent and severe symptom was dyspareunia. Patients with pain alone were most bothered (PFDI median 234.2, interquartile range 83, P = 0.02) and had the highest functional impact (PFIQ median 181, interquartile range 138, P < 0.001). After excision, only 33.3% of women with pain alone reported 'improved' symptoms (PGI-I), versus 73.9% with exposure, 58.3% with exposure plus pain (P = 0.03) with no differences in PGI-I by mesh type. VAS scores decreased in all groups, but PFDI and PFIQ did not improve in pain patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In women experiencing a pain complication after urogynaecological mesh insertion, mesh removal often does not improve symptoms.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Only 33% of women with pain complications have improved symptoms after urogynaecological mesh removal.

An Unusual Complication of Retropubic Midurethral Sling Placement: Obturator Neuralgia

Midurethral sling placement is a common treatment for female stress urinary incontinence. We report a case of a woman with a 9-month history of significant pelvic and right lower extremity pain following synthetic retropubic sling placement at an outside facility. On evaluation, she had unilateral obturator neuropathy and underwent combined vaginal, and robotic excision of the right arm of the sling. During surgery, the sling was adherent to the obturator nerve and passed laterally through the obturator fossa. Following removal, her pain completely resolved. This case highlights strategies for preventing, diagnosing, and managing an unusual complication of retropubic sling placement, obturator neuralgia.

Mesh Sling Arm Removal for Persistent Pain After an Initial Vaginal Suburethral Mesh Sling Removal Procedure

OBJECTIVES

Pain is a recognized complication of mid-urethral slings (MUS), which may lead to suburethral sling removal (SSR) alone, or to a more extensive removal approach. We report on the outcomes of women who required an SSR or an additional secondary MUS arm removal for pain only.

METHODS

After Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, the charts of nonneurogenic women who underwent SSR for pain only were reviewed. Demographic information, MUS type, self-reported pain resolution, and preoperative and postoperative questionnaires, including Urogenital Distress Inventory-Short form question 6 (UDI-6 Q6) scores, were collected for the SSR (group 1) and secondary removal (group 2) groups.

RESULTS

Of 52 women who underwent SSR for pain only between 2005 and 2018, 16 (31%) required a secondary procedure to remove the extension arms due to persistent pain after SSR. All women in group 2 experienced pain immediately after SSR (UDI-6 Q6 score of 2 to 3). Patients whose pain improved after SSR presented at a median 61 months after MUS whereas those in group 2 underwent SSR at median 34 months after MUS. Median duration of follow-up in group 2, after the secondary procedure, was 34 months. Over one half of those in group 2 (54%) noticed pain cure/improvement. Seven were left with persistent pain.

CONCLUSIONS

In women who underwent SSR for pain only, 67% reported pain resolution. An additional procedure to remove the extension arms of the mesh was performed in one third of women for persistent pain after SSR.

Rates of Sling Procedures and Revisions-A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe trends in sling procedures and revisions, including fascial slings and midurethral slings (MUS) using a large, national database with respect to the 2011 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) mesh-related safety communication.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional cohort study using data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database from 2010 to 2018, evaluating the prevalence of sling revision and fascial slings and their trends over time. Patients who underwent MUS, fascial slings, and sling revisions were identified by Current Procedural Terminology codes. Sling revisions and fascial slings were evaluated as a proportion of the total number of MUS performed per year. Three distinct periods were evaluated in relation to the 2011 FDA communication: 2010 to 2012, 2012 to 2015, and 2015 to 2018. Observed trends were assessed with Pearson correlation coefficients with a P value less than 0.05 considered significant.

RESULTS

During the study period, 32,657 slings were captured: 32,389 MUS and 268 fascial slings. The rate of sling revisions was low (0.4% in 2010 to 1.2% in 2015). Between 2012 and 2015, the rate of sling revision increased significantly (R = 1, P = 0.002); following 2015, the rate of sling revisions decreased significantly over time (R = -0.96, P = 0.04). The rate of fascial slings between 2012 and 2015 increased significantly (R = 0.95, P = 0.047); however, the rate plateaued starting in 2015 (R = -0.49, -P = 0.51).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that MUS remain the preferred procedure for treatment of stress urinary incontinence despite the recent FDA communications with MUS representing 99% of sling procedures during the study period.

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.

Mesh complications: best practice in diagnosis and treatment

Mesh was a promising, minimally invasive, and 'gold standard' treatment for urinary stress incontinence. Time has shown that complications from these devices can happen early, or even several years, after mesh placement and can be catastrophic. Pain, erosion, voiding dysfunction, infection, recurrent UTIs [urinary tract infections (UTIs)], fistulae, organ perforation, bleeding, vaginal scarring, neuromuscular alterations, LUTS (lower urinary tract symptoms), bowel complications and even immune disorders have been linked to mesh. Various tools, such as imaging, endoscopic and functional studies, are available for diagnosis of mesh complications. Since the spectrum of complications is wide, involvement of other specialties is usually beneficial in the diagnosis and management of these complications. There is still much to learn on the accuracy and utility of diagnostic studies in each type of complication. Evidence on the best diagnostic and treatment pathways for these complications is scarce but continuously growing as information is being reported, and we continue to gain expertise in dealing with patients affected by mesh. Treatment options include conservative and medical management initially and then open or minimally invasive surgical procedure approaches. This article will describe diagnostic and treatment pathways for mesh complications.