Self-cut titanium-coated polypropylene mesh versus pre-cut mesh-kit for transvaginal treatment of severe pelvic organ prolapse: study protocol for a multicenter non-inferiority trial

Ultralight type I transvaginal mesh: an alternative for recurrent severe posterior vaginal prolapse

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze the medium-term outcomes of ultralight type I mesh for postmenopausal women with recurrent severe posterior vaginal prolapse (PVP).

METHODS

All participants underwent transvaginal ultralight type I mesh repair between April 2016 and April 2021 and were followed until May 2022. Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POP-Q) staging, mesh-related complications, Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scale and quality of life questionnaire responses were evaluated. The primary outcome was composite surgical success rate at the last follow-up, composite success being defined as no vaginal bulge symptoms, no POP-Q point at or beyond the hymen and no re-treatment for POP. Secondary outcomes included anatomic outcomes (POP-Q score), symptomatic relief and complications.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 37.3 months. At the last follow-up, the composite success rate was 75%, and POP-Q scores for the vault and posterior wall and quality of life questionnaire scores were significantly improved (p < 0.01). The subjective satisfaction (PGI-I ≤ 2) rate was 83.3%. There were no mesh-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultralight mesh can achieve good clinical outcomes and substantially improve the quality of life of patients with severe recurrent PVP in the medium term, and may thus be a viable alternative for treating this condition.

Effectiveness of Self-cut vs Mesh-Kit Titanium-Coated Polypropylene Mesh for Transvaginal Treatment of Severe Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Multicenter Randomized Noninferiority Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Transvaginal mesh (TVM) can increase the durability of vaginal surgical procedures for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and may be indicated in certain situations despite concerns about mesh-related complications. In addition, the expense of commercial mesh kits has limited their use. The effectiveness, safety, and cost of a self-cut mesh procedure compared with a commercial mesh-kit procedure for the surgical treatment of women with POP is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the 1-year effectiveness and safety of self-cut titanium-coated polypropylene mesh compared with a precut commercial mesh kit for the transvaginal surgical treatment of women with severe symptomatic POP.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This multicenter randomized noninferiority clinical trial was conducted at 11 hospitals in 8 provinces of China. A total of 336 women with symptomatic stage 3 to 4 POP were enrolled between January 22, 2018, and November 11, 2019, with follow-up through December 11, 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomized to receive a TVM procedure using either self-cut mesh (self-cut mesh group) or a precut commercial mesh kit (mesh-kit group), both of which used the same titanium-coated polypropylene mesh.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was composite surgical success at 1 year, which was defined as the absence of vaginal bulge symptoms, no additional retreatment for POP, and no vaginal prolapse at or beyond the hymen. Secondary outcomes included symptom-specific pelvic floor function and quality-of-life measures as well as perioperative complications, including mesh-related complications and hospitalization costs. Complications were categorized using the Clavien-Dindo system (with grade 1 indicating any deviation from the normal postoperative course but not requiring grade 2-4 interventions; grade 2, need for pharmacological treatment, blood transfusion, and/or total parenteral nutrition; grade 3, the need for surgical, endoscopic, and/or interventional radiological procedures; and grade 4, life threatening).

RESULTS

Among 336 female participants (mean [SD] age, 63.3 [5.9] years; all of Chinese ethnicity), 169 patients were randomized to the self-cut mesh group, and 167 were randomized to the mesh-kit group. Three patients were unavailable for follow-up after 1 year. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 162 women (95.9%) in the self-cut mesh group had outcomes that met the definition of surgical success; this result was noninferior to the surgical success rate observed in the mesh-kit group (146 women [87.4%]; risk difference, 8.5%; 95% CI, 2.2%-14.3%; P = .006). The frequency of Clavien-Dindo grade 1 to 3 perioperative complications was not significant between groups (12 of 166 women [7.2%] in the self-cut mesh group vs 20 of 161 women [12.4%] in the mesh-kit group; P = .14). Vaginal mesh exposure rates in women examined at 1 year were similar (4 women [2.4%] in the self-cut mesh group vs 8 women [4.8%] in the mesh-kit group; P = .23). Median (IQR) total hospitalization costs were $3663.00 ($3258.90-$4495.10) in the self-cut mesh group vs $6144.00 ($5434.90-$7160.20) in the mesh-kit group (P < .01), representing savings of $2481.00 (40.4%) with the use of self-cut mesh.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this clinical trial, the composite surgical success rate of a self-cut mesh procedure was noninferior to that of a commercial mesh-kit procedure using the same titanium-coated polypropylene mesh and reduced hospitalization expenses by 40.4%. These findings suggest that the use of self-cut mesh procedures may be advantageous for the surgical treatment of some women with severe POP, particularly those in countries with low and middle income.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03283124.