Literature DB >> 20227672

Use of vaginal mesh in the face of recent FDA warnings and litigation.

Sara J Mucowski1, Catalin Jurnalov, John Y Phelps.   

Abstract

Choosing to use mesh in vaginal reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse or stress urinary incontinence is perplexing in the face of recent US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warnings. In October 2008, the FDA alerted practitioners to complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh. Litigation is another concern. A Google search of "transvaginal mesh" results in numerous hits for plaintiff attorneys seeking patients with complications related to use of mesh. In light of a recent decision by the US Supreme Court and strategies by manufactures of medical devices to escape liability, it is imperative that gynecologic surgeons using transvaginal mesh document proper informed consent in the medical records. The purpose of this commentary is not to deter gynecologic surgeons from using transvaginal mesh when appropriate, but to provide an overview of current medical-legal controversies and stress the importance of documenting informed consent. Copyright (c) 2010 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20227672     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.01.060

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  11 in total

1.  Population-based trends in ambulatory surgery for urinary incontinence.

Authors:  Anne M Suskind; Samuel R Kaufman; Rodney L Dunn; John T Stoffel; J Quentin Clemens; Brent K Hollenbeck
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-06-06       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 2.  Traditional native tissue versus mesh-augmented pelvic organ prolapse repairs: providing an accurate interpretation of current literature.

Authors:  E J Stanford; A Cassidenti; M D Moen
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  While we wait for a new regulatory framework for surgical mesh.

Authors:  Gunnar Lose; Søren Gräs
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Implications of the FDA statement on transvaginal placement of mesh: the aftermath.

Authors:  Michelle E Koski; Eric S Rovner
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  Pelvic surgeons caught in the meshes of the law.

Authors:  Toyohiko Watanabe; Michael B Chancellor
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2012

6.  An appraisal of the Food and Drug Administration warning on urogynecologic surgical mesh.

Authors:  Lindsey C Menchen; Alan J Wein; Ariana L Smith
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 3.092

7.  Shifts in national rates of inpatient prolapse surgery emphasize current coding inadequacies.

Authors:  Sarah L Bradley; Alison C Weidner; Nazema Y Siddiqui; Mihir P Gandhi; Jennifer M Wu
Journal:  Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 2.091

8.  Attitudes toward transvaginal mesh among patients in a urogynecology practice.

Authors:  Sybil G Dessie; Michele R Hacker; Miriam J Haviland; Peter L Rosenblatt
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-01-17       Impact factor: 2.894

9.  Is mesh becoming more popular? Dilemmas in urogynecology: a national survey.

Authors:  Alexander Condrea; Itamar Netzer; Shimon Ginath; Joseph Eldor-Itskovitz; Abraham Golan; Lior Lowenstein
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Int       Date:  2011-11-15

10.  Pacemakers are not vacuum cleaners Towards new guidelines for the introduction of novel medical devices in pelvic floor surgery.

Authors:  J Deprest; D De Ridder
Journal:  Facts Views Vis Obgyn       Date:  2011
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.