International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 27, Issue 9, pp 1347–1355 | Cite as

Incidence and risk factors for mesh erosion after laparoscopic repair of pelvic organ prolapse by lateral suspension with mesh

  • Patrick Dällenbach
  • Sara Sofia De Oliveira
  • Sandra Marras
  • Michel Boulvain
Original Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The objective of our study was to estimate the incidence and identify the risk factors for mesh erosion after laparoscopic repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) by lateral suspension with mesh.

Methods

We conducted a nested case–control study among 480 women who underwent POP repair by laparoscopic lateral suspension with mesh from January 2004 to October 2012. Cases (n = 18) were women who showed mesh erosion following the first intervention through December 2014. Controls (n = 133) were women randomly selected from the same cohort who did not have any erosion.

Results

The risk of mesh erosion was 3.8 % with a mean follow-up of 82.3 months (range 28.2 – 130.6 months). The main risk factor was the use of a type 3 mesh (macroporous with either multifilamentous or microporous components) rather than a type 1 mesh (macroporous and monofilamentous; adjusted OR 13.0, 95 % CI 1.5 – 110.6; P = 0.02). Risk factors included smoking (adjusted OR 10.4, 95 % CI 2.3 – 46.5; P < 0.01) and posterior mesh placement (adjusted OR 5.1, 95 % CI 1.2 – 21.8 P = 0.03).

Conclusions

The risk of mesh erosion is low and may be further reduced by using the appropriate mesh material, and by identifying specific patient characteristics such as tobacco use. As conventional vaginal surgery is effective for the treatment of the posterior compartment, the use of posterior mesh during laparoscopic pelvic floor repair needs to be questioned.

Keywords

Nested case–control study Pelvic organ prolapse Incidence Risk factors Mesh erosion Laparoscopy 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Dr. M. Francis Dällenbach for correcting the English.

This study was conducted with the support of the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics of the University of Geneva.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Barber MD, Maher C (2013) Epidemiology and outcome assessment of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 24:1783–1790CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL (1997) Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 89:501–506CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fialkow MF, Newton KM, Lentz GM, Weiss NS (2008) Lifetime risk of surgical management for pelvic organ prolapse or urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19:437–440CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Smith FJ, Holman CD, Moorin RE, Tsokos N (2010) Lifetime risk of undergoing surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 116:1096–1100CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jakus SM, Shapiro A, Hall CD (2008) Biologic and synthetic graft use in pelvic surgery: a review. Obstet Gynecol Surv 63:253–266CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fatton B, Amblard J, Debodinance P, Cosson M, Jacquetin B (2007) Transvaginal repair of genital prolapse: preliminary results of a new tension-free vaginal mesh (Prolift technique) – a case series multicentric study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18:743–752CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yamada BS, Govier FE, Stefanovic KB, Kobashi KC (2006) Vesicovaginal fistula and mesh erosion after Perigee (transobturator polypropylene mesh anterior repair). Urology 68(1121):e5–e7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Margulies RU, Lewicky-Gaupp C, Fenner DE, McGuire EJ, Clemens JQ, Delancey JO (2008) Complications requiring reoperation following vaginal mesh kit procedures for prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 199(678):e1–e4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Collinet P, Belot F, Debodinance P, Ha Duc E, Lucot JP, Cosson M (2006) Transvaginal mesh technique for pelvic organ prolapse repair: mesh exposure management and risk factors. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 17:315–320CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lane FE (1962) Repair of posthysterectomy vaginal-vault prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 20:72–7CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    FDA (2011) Urogynecologic surgical mesh: update on the safety and effectiveness of transvaginal placement for pelvic organ prolapse. FDA/CDRH. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/medicaldevices/safety/alertsandnotices/ucm262760.pdf. Accessed 7 February 2016
  12. 12.
    de Tayrac R, Sentilhes L (2013) Complications of pelvic organ prolapse surgery and methods of prevention. Int Urogynecol J 24:1859–1872CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, Connolly A, Cundiff G, Weber AM, Zyczynski H (2004) Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol 104:805–823CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dubuisson JB, Eperon I, Jacob S, Dubuisson J, Wenger JM, Dallenbach P, Kaelin-Gambirasio I (2011) Laparoscopic repair of pelvic organ prolapse by lateral suspension with mesh: a continuous series of 218 patients. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 39:127–131CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cundiff GW, Varner E, Visco AG, Zyczynski HM, Nager CW, Norton PA, Schaffer J, Brown MB, Brubaker L (2008) Risk factors for mesh/suture erosion following sacral colpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 199(688):e1–e5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lowman JK, Woodman PJ, Nosti PA, Bump RC, Terry CL, Hale DS (2008) Tobacco use is a risk factor for mesh erosion after abdominal sacral colpoperineopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 198(561):e1–e4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nosti PA, Lowman JK, Zollinger TW, Hale DS, Woodman PJ (2009) Risk of mesh erosion after abdominal sacral colpoperineopexy with concomitant hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 201(541):e1–e4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Osmundsen BC, Clark A, Goldsmith C, Adams K, Denman MA, Edwards R, Gregory WT (2012) Mesh erosion in robotic sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 18:86–88CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stepanian AA, Miklos JR, Moore RD, Mattox TF (2008) Risk of mesh extrusion and other mesh-related complications after laparoscopic sacral colpopexy with or without concurrent laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy: experience of 402 patients. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 15:188–196CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tan-Kim J, Menefee SA, Luber KM, Nager CW, Lukacz ES (2011) Prevalence and risk factors for mesh erosion after laparoscopic-assisted sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J 22:205–212CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Baden W, Walker T (1992) Surgical repair of vaginal defects. Lippincott, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Milani R, Salvatore S, Soligo M, Pifarotti P, Meschia M, Cortese M (2005) Functional and anatomical outcome of anterior and posterior vaginal prolapse repair with prolene mesh. BJOG 112:107–111CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Giraudet G, Cosson M (2015) Intra and post operative complications of sacrocolpopexy/management and prevention. Proceedings of the IUGA 40th Annual Meeting, 9–13 June 2015, Nice. p. Diapositive 10/29. http://2015.iuga.org/wp-content/uploads/workshops/ws13_cosson.pdf
  24. 24.
    Karram M, Maher C (2013) Surgery for posterior vaginal wall prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 24:1835–1841CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Amid PK (1997) Classification of biomaterials and their related complications in abdominal wall hernia surgery. Hernia 1:15–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Akyol A, Akca A, Ulker V, Gedikbasi A, Kublay A, Han A, Ark HC, Numanoglu C (2014) Additional surgical risk factors and patient characteristics for mesh erosion after abdominal sacrocolpopexy. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 40:1368–1374CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mosely LH, Finseth F (1977) Cigarette smoking: impairment of digital blood flow and wound healing in the hand. Hand 9:97–101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Porter SE, Hanley EN Jr (2001) The musculoskeletal effects of smoking. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 9:9–17CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sayasneh A, Johnson H (2010) Risk factors for mesh erosion complicating vaginal reconstructive surgery. J Obstet Gynaecol 30:721–724CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jia X, Glazener C, Mowatt G, Jenkinson D, Fraser C, Bain C, Burr J (2010) Systematic review of the efficacy and safety of using mesh in surgery for uterine or vaginal vault prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 21:1413–1431CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecological Association 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Dällenbach
    • 1
  • Sara Sofia De Oliveira
    • 1
  • Sandra Marras
    • 1
  • Michel Boulvain
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Division of Gynecology, Urogynecology UnitGeneva University HospitalsGenève 14Switzerland
  2. 2.Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Epidemiology and Research in Obstetrics and Gynecology UnitGeneva University HospitalsGenevaSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations