International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 3–15

An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) / International Continence Society (ICS) joint terminology and classification of the complications related directly to the insertion of prostheses (meshes, implants, tapes) & grafts in female pelvic floor surgery

  • Bernard T. Haylen
  • Robert M. Freeman
  • Steven E. Swift
  • Michel Cosson
  • G. Willy Davila
  • Jan Deprest
  • Peter L. Dwyer
  • Brigitte Fatton
  • Ervin Kocjancic
  • Joseph Lee
  • Chris Maher
  • Eckhard Petri
  • Diaa E. Rizk
  • Peter K. Sand
  • Gabriel N. Schaer
  • Ralph J. Webb
Special Contribution

DOI: 10.1007/s00192-010-1324-9

Cite this article as:
Haylen, B.T., Freeman, R.M., Swift, S.E. et al. Int Urogynecol J (2011) 22: 3. doi:10.1007/s00192-010-1324-9

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

A terminology and standardized classification has yet to be developed for those complications arising directly from the insertion of synthetic (prostheses) and biological (grafts) materials in female pelvic floor surgery.

Methods

This report on the above terminology and classification combines the input of members of the Standardization and Terminology Committees of two International Organizations, the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) and the International Continence Society (ICS) and a Joint IUGA/ICS Working Group on Complications Terminology, assisted at intervals by many expert external referees. An extensive process of 11 rounds of internal and external review took place with exhaustive examination of each aspect of the terminology and classification. Decision-making was by collective opinion (consensus).

Results

A terminology and classification of complications related directly to the insertion of prostheses and grafts in female pelvic floor surgery has been developed, with the classification based on category (C), time (T) and site (S) classes and divisions, that should encompass all conceivable scenarios for describing insertion complications and healing abnormalities. The CTS code for each complication, involving three (or four) letters and three numerals, is likely to be very suitable for any surgical audit or registry, particularly one that is procedure-specific. Users of the classification have been assisted by case examples, colour charts and online aids (www.icsoffice.org/complication).

Conclusions

A consensus-based terminology and classification report for prosthess and grafts complications in female pelvic floor surgery has been produced, aimed at being a significant aid to clinical practice and research.

Keywords

ClassificationComplicationProsthesisMeshGraftFemale pelvic floor surgery

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecological Association 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernard T. Haylen
    • 1
    • 17
  • Robert M. Freeman
    • 2
  • Steven E. Swift
    • 3
  • Michel Cosson
    • 4
  • G. Willy Davila
    • 5
  • Jan Deprest
    • 6
  • Peter L. Dwyer
    • 7
  • Brigitte Fatton
    • 8
  • Ervin Kocjancic
    • 9
  • Joseph Lee
    • 10
  • Chris Maher
    • 11
  • Eckhard Petri
    • 12
  • Diaa E. Rizk
    • 13
  • Peter K. Sand
    • 14
  • Gabriel N. Schaer
    • 15
  • Ralph J. Webb
    • 16
  1. 1.University of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Derriford HospitalPlymouthUK
  3. 3.Medical University of South CarolinaCharlestonUSA
  4. 4.University HospitalLilleFrance
  5. 5.Cleveland ClinicWestonUSA
  6. 6.University Hospital, UZ LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  7. 7.Mercy HospitalMelbourneAustralia
  8. 8.University HospitalClermont-FerrandFrance
  9. 9.Department of UrologyUniversity of IllinoisChicagoUSA
  10. 10.Monash HospitalMelbourneAustralia
  11. 11.Wesley HospitalBrisbaneAustralia
  12. 12.Urogynaecology DepartmentUniversity of GreifswaldGreifswaldGermany
  13. 13.Ain Shams UniversityCairoEgypt
  14. 14.Evanston Continence CentreEvanstonUSA
  15. 15.KantonsspitalAarauSwitzerland
  16. 16.Norfolk & Norwich University HospitalNorfolkUK
  17. 17.St Vincent’s ClinicDarlinghurstAustralia