Literature DB >> 19155908

Complication and reoperation rates after apical vaginal prolapse surgical repair: a systematic review.

Gouri B Diwadkar1, Matthew D Barber, Benjamin Feiner, Christopher Maher, J Eric Jelovsek.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare postoperative complication and reoperation rates for surgical procedures correcting apical vaginal prolapse. DATA SOURCES: Eligible studies were selected through an electronic literature search covering January 1985 to January 2008 using PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews and Effects. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Only clinical trials and observational studies addressing apical prolapse repair and recurrence or complication rates were included. The search was restricted to original articles published in English with 50 or more participants and a follow-up period of 3 months or longer. Oral platform and poster presentations from the American Urogynecological Society, the Society for Gynecologic Surgeons, the International Urogynecological Association, and the International Continence Society from January 2005 to December 2007 were hand searched to determine whether they were eligible for inclusion. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND
RESULTS: Procedures were separated into three groups: traditional vaginal surgery, sacral colpopexy, and vaginal mesh kits. Complications were classified using the Dindo grading system. Weighted averages were calculated for each Dindo grade, complication, and reoperation. Dindo grade IIIa (433/3,425 women) and IIIb (245/3,425) rates were highest in the mesh kit group owing to higher rates of mesh erosion (198/3,425) and fistulae (8/3,425). Reoperation rates for prolapse recurrence were highest in the traditional vaginal surgery group (308/7,827). The total reoperation rate was greatest in the mesh kit group (291/3, 425, 8.5%).
CONCLUSION: The rate of complications requiring reoperation and the total reoperation rate was highest for vaginal mesh kits despite a lower reoperation rate for prolapse recurrence and shorter overall follow-up.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19155908     DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318195888d

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  95 in total

Review 1.  Vaginal estrogen use in postmenopausal women with pelvic floor disorders: systematic review and practice guidelines.

Authors:  David D Rahn; Renée M Ward; Tatiana V Sanses; Cassandra Carberry; Mamta M Mamik; Kate V Meriwether; Cedric K Olivera; Husam Abed; Ethan M Balk; Miles Murphy
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2014-11-13       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  Managing mesh exposure following vaginal prolapse repair: a decision analysis comparing conservative versus surgical treatment.

Authors:  Laura C Skoczylas; Jonathan P Shepherd; Kenneth J Smith; Jerry L Lowder
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-06-30       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Clinical application of IUGA/ICS classification system for mesh erosion.

Authors:  Rebecca Posthuma Batalden; Milena M Weinstein; Caroline Foust-Wright; Marianna Alperin; May M Wakamatsu; Samantha J Pulliam
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 2.696

4.  A pilot study comparing anatomic failure after sacrocolpopexy with absorbable or permanent sutures for vaginal mesh attachment.

Authors:  Jasmine Tan-Kim; Shawn A Menefee; Quinn Lippmann; Emily S Lukacz; Karl M Luber; Charles W Nager
Journal:  Perm J       Date:  2014

5.  "Evidence-based medicine" to support the surgical procedures we perform on patients with pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  M M Karram
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2009-05-15

6.  Commercial pressures and professional ethics: troubling revisions to the recent ACOG Practice Bulletins on surgery for pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  L Lewis Wall; Douglas Brown
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2009-03-28

7.  Anatomical Position of Four Different Transobturator Mesh Implants for Female Anterior Prolapse Repair.

Authors:  F Lenz; S Doll; C Sohn; K A Brocker
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 2.915

8.  Perioperative complications in vaginal mesh procedures using trocar in pelvic organ prolapse repair.

Authors:  Fuat Demirci; Karakoc Birgul; Oya Demirci; Elif Demirci; Yavuz Akman; Erhan Karaalp; Nihal Dolgun
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2013-05-15

9.  Mesh complications and failure rates after transvaginal mesh repair compared with abdominal or laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and to native tissue repair in treating apical prolapse.

Authors:  Vani Dandolu; Megumi Akiyama; Gayle Allenback; Prathamesh Pathak
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-08-25       Impact factor: 2.894

10.  Deterioration in biomechanical properties of the vagina following implantation of a high-stiffness prolapse mesh.

Authors:  A Feola; S Abramowitch; Z Jallah; S Stein; W Barone; S Palcsey; P Moalli
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 6.531

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.