OBJECTIVES: To explore the need for secondary surgical procedures after transvaginal prolapse repair with mesh. METHODS: Women that had prolapse repair (Prolift(®) or Elevate(®)) were reviewed for reoperation and clinical/demographic data such as prior prolapse repair, prolapse grade, operative details, length of stay (LOS) and time to reoperation. Pearson's Chi-square, Fisher's exact tests and Wilcoxon rank tests were used. RESULTS: 77/335 women (23%) had 100 additional procedures. Median (range) time to reoperation was 51 (5-1168) days: four (1%) had primary prolapse surgery at a different site, three (1%) repeat prolapse repair from the same site, 23 (7%) surgery for complications and 50 (15%) had stress urinary incontinence (SUI)/sling-related procedures. When no reoperation versus reoperation groups were compared, mean LOS (1.8 vs. 2.0 days; p = 0.044) and follow-up (228 vs. 354 days; p = 0.002) were longer in the reoperations group; postoperative hemoglobin was lower (10.8 vs. 10.4; p = 0.031). Patients with a prolapse reoperation were 10 years younger (67 vs. 57 years; p = 0.027) than patients that either had a reoperation for other reasons or had no reoperations. Patients with concomitant sling and persistent SUI requiring repeat SUI surgery were older (mean 72 vs. 66 years; p = 0.038), had prior prolapse repair (53 vs. 27%; p = 0.017) and had anterior compartment mesh (84 vs. 56%; p = 0.037); median operative times (78 vs. 104 min; p = 0.008) and mean LOS were shorter (median 1.6 vs. 1.9 days; p = 0.045). For patients without concomitant sling, no demographic or perioperative differences were found between those that did (n = 10) and did not (n = 86) develop de novo SUI that required reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Most reoperations were for sling management and SUI; few were for mesh complications or prolapse recurrence.
OBJECTIVES: To explore the need for secondary surgical procedures after transvaginal prolapse repair with mesh. METHODS:Women that had prolapse repair (Prolift(®) or Elevate(®)) were reviewed for reoperation and clinical/demographic data such as prior prolapse repair, prolapse grade, operative details, length of stay (LOS) and time to reoperation. Pearson's Chi-square, Fisher's exact tests and Wilcoxon rank tests were used. RESULTS: 77/335 women (23%) had 100 additional procedures. Median (range) time to reoperation was 51 (5-1168) days: four (1%) had primary prolapse surgery at a different site, three (1%) repeat prolapse repair from the same site, 23 (7%) surgery for complications and 50 (15%) had stress urinary incontinence (SUI)/sling-related procedures. When no reoperation versus reoperation groups were compared, mean LOS (1.8 vs. 2.0 days; p = 0.044) and follow-up (228 vs. 354 days; p = 0.002) were longer in the reoperations group; postoperative hemoglobin was lower (10.8 vs. 10.4; p = 0.031). Patients with a prolapse reoperation were 10 years younger (67 vs. 57 years; p = 0.027) than patients that either had a reoperation for other reasons or had no reoperations. Patients with concomitant sling and persistent SUI requiring repeat SUI surgery were older (mean 72 vs. 66 years; p = 0.038), had prior prolapse repair (53 vs. 27%; p = 0.017) and had anterior compartment mesh (84 vs. 56%; p = 0.037); median operative times (78 vs. 104 min; p = 0.008) and mean LOS were shorter (median 1.6 vs. 1.9 days; p = 0.045). For patients without concomitant sling, no demographic or perioperative differences were found between those that did (n = 10) and did not (n = 86) develop de novo SUI that required reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Most reoperations were for sling management and SUI; few were for mesh complications or prolapse recurrence.
Authors: Philip Toozs-Hobson; Robert Freeman; Matthew Barber; Christopher Maher; Bernard Haylen; Stavros Athanasiou; Steven Swift; Kristene Whitmore; Gamal Ghoniem; Dirk de Ridder Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: John N Nguyen; Sharon M Jakus-Waldman; Andrew J Walter; Terry White; Shawn A Menefee Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Charles W Nager; Larry Sirls; Heather J Litman; Holly Richter; Ingrid Nygaard; Toby Chai; Stephen Kraus; Halina Zyczynski; Kim Kenton; Liyuan Huang; John Kusek; Gary Lemack Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-06-16 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Larry T Sirls; Gregory P McLennan; Kim A Killinger; Judith A Boura; Melissa Fischer; Pradeep Nagaraju; Kenneth Peters Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2013 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: Reijo Hiltunen; Kari Nieminen; Teuvo Takala; Eila Heiskanen; Mauri Merikari; Kirsti Niemi; Pentti K Heinonen Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Laura N Nguyen; Morgan Gruner; Kim A Killinger; Kenneth M Peters; Judith A Boura; Michelle Jankowski; Larry T Sirls Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2018-03-16 Impact factor: 2.370