Literature DB >> 27275803

Surgeon Experience and Complications of Transvaginal Prolapse Mesh.

Erin C Kelly1, Jennifer Winick-Ng, Blayne Welk.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To measure the proportion of women with transvaginal prolapse mesh complications and their association with surgeon volume.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, population-based cohort study of all women who underwent a mesh-based prolapse procedure using administrative data (hospital procedure and physician billing records) between 2002 and 2013 in Ontario, Canada. The primary outcome was surgical revision of the mesh. Primary exposure was surgeon volume: high (greater than the 75th percentile, requiring a median of five [interquartile range 5-6] procedures per year) and very high (greater than the 90th percentile, requiring a median of 13 [interquartile range 11-14] procedures per year) volume mesh implanters were identified each year. Primary analysis was an adjusted Cox proportional hazards model.
RESULTS: A total of 5,488 women underwent mesh implantation by 1 of 368 unique surgeons. Median follow-up time was 5.4 (interquartile range 3.0-8.0) years. We found that 218 women (4.0%) underwent mesh reoperation a median of 1.17 (interquartile range 0.58-2.90) years after implantation. The hazard of reoperation for complications was only lower for patients of very high-volume surgeons (3.0% [145/3,001] compared with 4.8% [73/2,447], adjusted hazards ratio 0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.40-0.86). In multivariable modeling, younger age, concomitant hysterectomy, blood transfusion, and increased medical comorbidity were all associated with vaginal mesh reoperation.
CONCLUSION: Approximately 5% of women who underwent mesh-based prolapse surgery required reoperation for a mesh complication within 10 years. The risk of reoperation was lowest for surgeons performing 14 or more procedures per year.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27275803     DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001450

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


  8 in total

Review 1.  Canadian Urological Association position statement on the use of transvaginal mesh.

Authors:  Blayne Welk; Kevin V Carlson; Richard J Baverstock; Stephen S Steele; Gregory G Bailly; Duane R Hickling
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Efficacy and patient satisfaction of pelvic organ prolapse reduction using transvaginal mesh: A Canadian perspective.

Authors:  Mélanie Aubé; Marilyne Guérin; Caroline Rheaume; Le Mai Tu
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2018-05-28       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  Association between method of pelvic organ prolapse repair involving the vaginal apex and re-operation: a population-based, retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  You Maria Wu; Jennifer Reid; Queena Chou; Barry MacMillan; Yvonne Leong; Blayne Welk
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2018-10-16       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse by the Downregulation of the Expression of Mitofusin 2 in Uterosacral Ligament Tissue via Mesenchymal Stem Cells.

Authors:  Xiaoqing Wang; Ruiju He; Songwen Nian; Bingbing Xiao; Yu Wang; Lei Zhang; Xiaoxiao Wang; Ruilin Guo; Ye Lu
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-06       Impact factor: 4.141

5.  Second-Line Surgical Management After Midurethral Sling Failure.

Authors:  Joonbeom Kwon; Yeonjoo Kim; Duk Yoon Kim
Journal:  Int Neurourol J       Date:  2021-03-29       Impact factor: 2.835

Review 6.  Current trends and future perspectives in pelvic reconstructive surgery.

Authors:  Mélanie Aubé; Le Mai Tu
Journal:  Womens Health (Lond)       Date:  2018 Jan-Dec

7.  Surgeon's experience level and risk of reoperation after hip fracture surgery: an observational study on 30,945 patients in the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register 2011-2015.

Authors:  Ane L Authen; Eva Dybvik; Ove Furnes; Jan-Erik Gjertsen
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2018-06-04       Impact factor: 3.717

Review 8.  Long-term active surveillance of implantable medical devices: an analysis of factors determining whether current registries are adequate to expose safety and efficacy problems.

Authors:  Samprit Banerjee; Bruce Campbell; Josh Rising; Allan Coukell; Art Sedrakyan
Journal:  BMJ Surg Interv Health Technol       Date:  2019-07-03
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.