Der Gynäkologe

, Volume 46, Issue 7, pp 463–468

Vaginale Deszensuschirurgie mit Gewebeersatz

Ein Update
Leitthema

Zusammenfassung

Die vaginale Netzchirurgie ist gleichermaßen innovativ wie umstritten. Transvaginale Zugangswege, Reduktion der Netzgewichte und inerte Beschichtungen reduzieren nachweisbar netzspezifische Komplikationen, sodass Patientinnen insbesondere in der Rezidiv- Prolapssituation von einer vaginalen Netzapplikation profitieren. Erweiterte Indikationsstellungen werden daher diskutiert und bereits klinisch umgesetzt. Die kritische Diskussion um die vaginale Netzchirurgie trägt dazu bei, mehr wissenschaftliche Daten zu rekrutieren, mehr Expertise in die operative Umsetzung einzubringen und die Betroffene noch aktiver in die Entscheidungsfindung für bzw. gegen eine vaginale Netzapplikation einzubinden. Die teils zu emotionale Bewertung der vaginalen Netzchirurgie verhindert mitunter den sinnvollen Einsatz und führt oft unzureichend indiziert zu Revisionsoperationen und kompletten Netzentfernungen, unter Umständen mit fragwürdigen forensischen Konsequenzen. Der Beitrag soll die aktuelle Situation zur Descensuschirurgie mit Gewebeersatz widerspiegeln sowie aus wissenschaftlicher und insbesondere klinischer Sicht kritisch Stellung beziehen.

Schlüsselwörter

Prolaps Abdominelle Sakrokolpopexie Vaginale Netze Polypropylen Minimal-invasive Chirurgie 

Vaginal prolapse surgery with tissue replacement

An update

Abstract

Vaginal mesh surgery is both innovative and controversial. It has been proven that transvaginal access, reduction of mesh weight and inert coatings reduce mesh-specific complications so that patients profit from the use of vaginal meshes particularly in recurrent prolapse situations. Extended indications were therefore discussed and have already been clinically implemented. The critical discussion on vaginal mesh surgery means that more scientific data are being recruited, more expertise is being incorporated into operative implementation and affected patients are being more actively included in decision-making for or against the use of vaginal meshes. The sometimes too emotional assessment of vaginal mesh surgery occasionally diminishes a reasonable implementation and often leads to insufficiently indicated revision operations and complete mesh removal under conditions with questionable legal consequences. This article describes the current situation for prolapse surgery with tissue replacement and takes a critical stance from a scientific and especially clinical perspective.

Keywords

Prolapse Abdominal sacral colpopexy Vaginal mesh Polypropylene Minimally invasive surgery 

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Nygaard et al (2004) Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol 104(4):805–823PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Moore R Miklos J (o J) Vaginal mesh kits for pelvic organ prolapse, friend or foe: a comprehensive review. TheScientificWorldJournal: TSW Urol 9:163–189Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Moore RD, Lukban JC (2012) Comparison of vaginal mesh extrusion rates between a lightweight type I polypropylene mesh versus heavier mesh in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 23(10):1379–1386PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lewis A, Driver M (2002) Blending with the body. J Chem Ed 79(3)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tunn R, Picot A, Marschke J et al (2007) Sonomorphological evaluation of polypropylene mesh implants after vaginal mesh repair in women with cystocele or rectocele. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 29(4):449–452PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Reisenauer C et al (2010) One-year clinical outcomes after prolapse surgery with nonanchored mesh and vaginal support device. Am J Obstet Gynecol 203(6):587.e1–587.e8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    AWMF-Leitlinie, Register- Nr 015/006Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Murphy M, Holzberg A, Raalte H van et al (2012) Time to rethink: an evidence based response from pelvic surgeons to the FDA safety communication- update on serious complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 23(1):5–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maher C, Baessler K, Feiner B, Adams EJ (2010) Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 14(4):CD004014Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO et al (1997) Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 89:501–506PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nieminen K, Hiltunen R, Heiskanen E et al (2008) Symptom resolution and sexual function after anterior vaginal wall repair with and without polypropylene mesh. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19:1611–1616PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dietz HP (2010) Pelvic floor ultrasound: a review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 202:321–334PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maher CF, Feiner B, DeCuyper EM et al (2011) Laparoscopic sacral colpopexie versus total vaginal mesh for vaginal vault prolpase: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 204(4):360–367PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bako A, Dhar R (2009) Review of synthetic mesh-related complications in pelvic-floor reconstructive surgery. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 20(1):103–111PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Altman D, Väyrynen T (2011) Anterior colporraphy versus transvaginal mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. N Engl J Med 364:1826–1836PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    An International Urogynecology Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) Joint terminology and classification of the complications related directly to the insertion of prostheses (Meshes, Implants, Tapes) and graft in female pelvic floor surgery; Haylen BT, Freeman RB, Swift SE et al (2011) Neurourology and Urodynamics. 30:2–12Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    American Urogynecologic SocietyFDA Issues 522 Orders for Postmarket Surveillance Studies: Urogynecological mesh implants 2012, Jan http://www.augs.org/p/bl/et/blogid=3&blogaid=34Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    (o A) (2012) Guidelines for providing privileges and credentials to physicians for transvaginal placement of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 18(4):194–197Google Scholar
  19. 19.
  20. 20.
    Nilsson CG, Palva K, Aarnio R (2013) Seventeen years‘ follow-up of the tension-free vaginal tape procedure for female stress urinary incontinence. J Int UrogynecologyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Klinik für Urogynäkologie, Deutsches BeckenbodenzentrumSt.-Hedwig-KrankenhausBerlinDeutschland

Personalised recommendations