Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Current Clinical Urology ((CCU))

  • 1131 Accesses

Abstract

The lifetime risk of requiring pelvic surgery for vaginal prolapse or incontinence for a woman in the United States is 11%, with a risk for reoperation of 29% [1]. Traditional vaginal repairs for prolapse using only the patient’s native tissues have had reported rates of recurrence ranging from 10 to 50% depending on the compartment repaired [2]. In the last 10 years, there have been advancements in pelvic floor reconstructive surgery to create repairs that are reproducible with improved subjective and objective outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, et al. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89:501–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, et al. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(4):CD004014.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Meschia M, Pifarotti P, Bernasconi F, et al. Porcine skin collagen implants to prevent anterior vaginal wall prolapse recurrence: a multicenter, randomized study. J Urol. 2007;177:192–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gandhi S, Goldberg RP, Kwon C, et al. A prospective randomized trial using solvent dehydrated fascia lata for the prevention of recurrent anterior vaginal wall prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:1649–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Weber AM, Walters MD, Piedmonte MR, et al. Anterior colporrhaphy: a randomized trial of three surgical techniques. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185:1299–304; discussion 1304–6.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Sand PK, Koduri S, Lobel RW, et al. Prospective randomized trial of polyglactin 910 mesh to prevent recurrence of cystoceles and rectoceles. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;184:1357–62; discussion 1362–4.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Paraiso MF, Barber MD, Muir TW, et al. Rectocele repair: a randomized trial of three surgical techniques including graft augmentation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195:1762–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Maher CF, Feiner B, DeCuyper EM, et al. Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy versus total vaginal mesh for vaginal vault prolapse: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;204:360.e1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ulmsten U, Petros P. Intravaginal slingplasty (IVS): an ambulatory surgical procedure for treatment of female urinary incontinence. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1995;29:75–82.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hiltunen R, Nieminen K, Takala T, et al. Low-weight polypropylene mesh for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110:455–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nguyen JN, Burchette RJ. Outcome after anterior vaginal prolapse repair: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111:891–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Altman D, Vayrynen T, Engh ME, et al. Anterior colporrhaphy versus transvaginal mesh for pelvic-organ prolapse. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:1826–36.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Goldman HB, Fitzgerald MP. Transvaginal mesh for cystocele repair. J Urol. 2010;183:430–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Firoozi F, Goldman HB. Transvaginal excision of mesh erosion involving the bladder after mesh placement using a prolapse kit: a novel technique. Urology. 2010;75:203–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sanses TV, Shahryarinejad A, Molden S, et al. Anatomic outcomes of vaginal mesh procedure (Prolift) compared with uterosacral ligament suspension and abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a Fellows’ Pelvic Research Network study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201 519.e1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ridgeway B, Walters MD, Paraiso MF, et al. Early experience with mesh excision for adverse outcomes after transvaginal mesh placement using prolapse kits. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199:703.e1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Firoozi F, Ingber MS, Moore CK, et al. Purely transvaginal/perineal management of complications from commercial prolapse kits using a new prostheses/grafts complication classification system. J Urol, 2012;187(5):1674–9.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Farzeen Firoozi MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Firoozi, F., Goldman, H.B. (2013). Transvaginal Mesh Complications. In: Goldman, H. (eds) Complications of Female Incontinence and Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery. Current Clinical Urology. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-61779-924-2_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-61779-924-2_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press, Totowa, NJ

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-61779-923-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-61779-924-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics