Vivien Wong1, Ka Lai Shek2, Judith Goh3, Hannah Krause3, Andrew Martin4, Hans Peter Dietz2. 1. Sydney Medical School Nepean, University of Sydney, Penrith, NSW, Australia. Electronic address: vivwlp@yahoo.co.nz. 2. Sydney Medical School Nepean, University of Sydney, Penrith, NSW, Australia. 3. Greenslopes Private Hospital, Queensland, Australia. 4. NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Mesh reinforcement in cystocele repair has become popular in recent years, with some evidence of reduced recurrence rates. In this retrospective cohort series, we aimed to assess subjective and objective outcomes, including ultrasound quantification of prolapse, following anterior colporrhaphy with and without mesh use for anterior compartment prolapse. STUDY DESIGN: We assessed anatomical and functional outcomes of patients after cystocele repair in three tertiary urogynecology units. Outcome measures included either objective prolapse recurrence (defined as cystocele≥Stage 2 ICS POP-Q or bladder descent ≥10mm below the symphysis pubis on ultrasound) or subjective prolapse recurrence (defined as symptoms of vaginal lump, bulge or dragging sensation post-operatively). Comparisons between mesh use and anterior colporrhaphy-only groups were undertaken, adjusting for potential confounders (age, BMI, vaginal parity, previous prolapse repair, levator avulsion and length of follow-up) using multiple linear regression and logistic regression methods. RESULTS: 183 patients were assessed at an average follow-up of 4 years. Eight-three patients had anterior colporrhaphy between January 2002 and December 2005, and 100 had an anterior mesh repair between March 2004 and October 2008. Forty-six (55%) patients in the anterior colporrhaphy group compared to 33 (33%) in the mesh use group were diagnosed with a recurrent cystocele (≥stage 2) (p=0.002). After adjustment for age, BMI, previous vaginal delivery, previous vaginal repair surgery, and length of follow-up, the benefit of mesh on prolapse recurrence was principally experienced by women with major levator trauma. CONCLUSIONS: At a mean of four years' follow-up, mesh augmentation was associated with reduced cystocele recurrence, but this effect was limited to patients with levator avulsion.
OBJECTIVE: Mesh reinforcement in cystocele repair has become popular in recent years, with some evidence of reduced recurrence rates. In this retrospective cohort series, we aimed to assess subjective and objective outcomes, including ultrasound quantification of prolapse, following anterior colporrhaphy with and without mesh use for anterior compartment prolapse. STUDY DESIGN: We assessed anatomical and functional outcomes of patients after cystocele repair in three tertiary urogynecology units. Outcome measures included either objective prolapse recurrence (defined as cystocele≥Stage 2 ICS POP-Q or bladder descent ≥10mm below the symphysis pubis on ultrasound) or subjective prolapse recurrence (defined as symptoms of vaginal lump, bulge or dragging sensation post-operatively). Comparisons between mesh use and anterior colporrhaphy-only groups were undertaken, adjusting for potential confounders (age, BMI, vaginal parity, previous prolapse repair, levator avulsion and length of follow-up) using multiple linear regression and logistic regression methods. RESULTS: 183 patients were assessed at an average follow-up of 4 years. Eight-three patients had anterior colporrhaphy between January 2002 and December 2005, and 100 had an anterior mesh repair between March 2004 and October 2008. Forty-six (55%) patients in the anterior colporrhaphy group compared to 33 (33%) in the mesh use group were diagnosed with a recurrent cystocele (≥stage 2) (p=0.002). After adjustment for age, BMI, previous vaginal delivery, previous vaginal repair surgery, and length of follow-up, the benefit of mesh on prolapse recurrence was principally experienced by women with major levator trauma. CONCLUSIONS: At a mean of four years' follow-up, mesh augmentation was associated with reduced cystocele recurrence, but this effect was limited to patients with levator avulsion.
Authors: K Baeßler; T Aigmüller; S Albrich; C Anthuber; D Finas; T Fink; C Fünfgeld; B Gabriel; U Henscher; F H Hetzer; M Hübner; B Junginger; K Jundt; S Kropshofer; A Kuhn; L Logé; G Nauman; U Peschers; T Pfiffer; O Schwandner; A Strauss; R Tunn; V Viereck Journal: Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 2.915
Authors: Luyun Chen; Florian Lenz; Céline D Alt; Christof Sohn; John O De Lancey; Kerstin A Brocker Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2017-01-25 Impact factor: 2.894