Vaginal mesh erosion after transvaginal repair of cystocele using Gynemesh or Gynemesh-Soft in 138 women: a comparative study
- PMID: 16391882
- DOI: 10.1007/s0192-005-0041-2
Vaginal mesh erosion after transvaginal repair of cystocele using Gynemesh or Gynemesh-Soft in 138 women: a comparative study
Abstract
The objective of this study was to compare mesh erosion after transvaginal repair of cystocele using Gynemesh or Gynemesh-Soft mesh. We retrospectively analyzed 138 consecutive cases of transvaginal repair of cystocele using synthetic mesh. The study endpoint was the pathological evidence of vaginal erosion. Multiple logistic regression was used to determine independent predictors of vaginal erosion. One hundred and thirty eight women (ages 30-83 years) with cystocele between October 1999 and October 2004, from a French University Hospital, participated in this study. Cystocele repair was performed in all patients according to the technique of tension-free polypropylene mesh. The median follow-up was 32.1 months (range 7.5-59.9) in the Gynemesh group and 7.1 months (range 1-21.9) in the Gynemesh-Soft group. Vaginal erosion was reported in 27 (20%) of the patients. Anatomically, the success rate was 95% (131/138). There was no statistically significant difference between the Gynemesh and the Gynemesh-Soft meshes [the rate of vaginal erosion of the mesh was 16% (15/89) vs 24% (12/49), respectively, p=0.39]. Univariate analysis only identified age class as factor significantly associated with the probability of vaginal erosion. Multivariate analysis revealed that age class is an independent predictive factor of vaginal erosion (age > 70 years, odds ratio (OR) 3.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-9.7, p=0.010). Furthermore cystocele stage > 2 (Baden and Walker classification) is a protective factor against vaginal erosion (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.8, p=0.016). Thirteen symptomatic patients (13/27, 48%) necessitated a partial excision of the mesh, associated with a vaginal mucosal closure. Two patients (2/27, 7%) underwent a complete excision of the mesh. The incidence of de novo dyspareunia was 9% in patients with vaginal erosion and 11% in patient without mesh erosion (p=0.85). There was no occurrence of bladder or urethral erosion and no vaginal or pelvic infection. Isolated vaginal erosion of the mesh did not prove to be problematic. Gynemesh-Soft mesh does not decrease the incidence of vaginal erosion. Age > 70 years is an independent predictive factor of vaginal erosion. We recommend that mesh placement by vaginal route should be avoided by women with moderate cystocele. Where possible, total hysterectomy and vertical incision should also be avoided. Management of vaginal erosion is simple and is associated with a low rate of morbidity. However, patients should be informed that vaginal erosion of the mesh can occur. A multivariate analysis reveals that the incidence of vaginal erosion is not significantly different between Gynemesh and Gynemesh-Soft meshes. Other factors of erosion are analyzed.
Similar articles
-
[Vaginal mesh extrusion after transvaginal repair of cystocele using a prosthetic mesh: Treatment and functional outcomes].J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2006 Nov;35(7):678-84. doi: 10.1016/s0368-2315(06)76463-8. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2006. PMID: 17088768 French.
-
[Three years results of transvaginal cystocele repair with polypropylene mesh using a tension-free technique].Actas Urol Esp. 2010 Jan;34(1):82-7. Actas Urol Esp. 2010. PMID: 20223137 Clinical Trial. Spanish.
-
[Cystocele repair by vaginal approach with a tension-free transversal polypropylene mesh. Technique and results].Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2004 Apr;32(4):280-4. doi: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2004.02.004. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2004. PMID: 15123096 French.
-
Mesh-related infections after pelvic organ prolapse repair surgery.Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2007 Oct;134(2):147-56. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2007.02.024. Epub 2007 Apr 24. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2007. PMID: 17459563 Review.
-
[Prevention of the complications related to the use of prosthetic meshes in prolapse surgery: guidelines for clinical practice - literature review].J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2011 Dec;40(8):827-50. doi: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2011.09.011. Epub 2011 Nov 5. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2011. PMID: 22056180 Review. French.
Cited by
-
A novel technique for anterior vaginal wall prolapse repair: anterior vaginal wall darn.ScientificWorldJournal. 2013;2013:198542. doi: 10.1155/2013/198542. Epub 2013 Feb 12. ScientificWorldJournal. 2013. PMID: 23476121 Free PMC article.
-
Complications of pelvic organ prolapse surgery and methods of prevention.Int Urogynecol J. 2013 Nov;24(11):1859-72. doi: 10.1007/s00192-013-2177-9. Int Urogynecol J. 2013. PMID: 24142061 Review.
-
Seeking new surgical predictors of mesh exposure after transvaginal mesh repair.Int Urogynecol J. 2016 Oct;27(10):1547-55. doi: 10.1007/s00192-016-2996-6. Epub 2016 Mar 18. Int Urogynecol J. 2016. PMID: 26992722
-
Polypropylene mesh and the host response.Int Urogynecol J. 2012 Jun;23(6):669-79. doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-1718-y. Epub 2012 Mar 20. Int Urogynecol J. 2012. PMID: 22430945 Review.
-
[Vaginal pelvic repair. Always with mesh or not?].Urologe A. 2009 Sep;48(9):1038-43. doi: 10.1007/s00120-009-2080-7. Urologe A. 2009. PMID: 19669726 Review. German.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Other Literature Sources
Medical