Mélanie Aubé1, Marilyne Guérin2, Caroline Rheaume2, Le Mai Tu1,3. 1. Department of Urology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke (CHUS), Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université Laval (CHUL), Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada. 3. Department of Urology, Institut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Sherbrooke (IUGS), Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Due to U.S Food and Drud Administration warnings and class-action lawsuits, the use of transvaginal mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery is controversial. We report data from two Canadian centres, focusing on recurrence and reoperation rates, complication rates, and patient satisfaction. METHODS: A retrospective medical chart review was performed. Patients were also invited to a long-term followup clinic for a complete questionnaire and gynecological exam. Patients unable to present to clinic for followup had the option to answer the questionnaire via telephone. RESULTS: A total of 334 patients were operated between 2000 and 2013. Median followup was 38 months for questionnaire and 36 months for physical exam. Thirty-seven patients (11.1%) required repeat operation, including 17 for recurrent prolapse and 10 for mesh exposure; 98.8% of patients reported feeling subjectively improved by their prolapse surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Midterm results are satisfactory and patient subjective satisfaction is high following transvaginal mesh repair of pelvic organ prolapse.
INTRODUCTION: Due to U.S Food and Drud Administration warnings and class-action lawsuits, the use of transvaginal mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery is controversial. We report data from two Canadian centres, focusing on recurrence and reoperation rates, complication rates, and patient satisfaction. METHODS: A retrospective medical chart review was performed. Patients were also invited to a long-term followup clinic for a complete questionnaire and gynecological exam. Patients unable to present to clinic for followup had the option to answer the questionnaire via telephone. RESULTS: A total of 334 patients were operated between 2000 and 2013. Median followup was 38 months for questionnaire and 36 months for physical exam. Thirty-seven patients (11.1%) required repeat operation, including 17 for recurrent prolapse and 10 for mesh exposure; 98.8% of patients reported feeling subjectively improved by their prolapse surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Midterm results are satisfactory and patient subjective satisfaction is high following transvaginal mesh repair of pelvic organ prolapse.
Authors: Steven Swift; Sarah Morris; Vikki McKinnie; Robert Freeman; Eckhard Petri; Richard J Scotti; Peter Dwyer Journal: Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct Date: 2006-04-06
Authors: Mitesh Parekh; Steven Swift; Nucelio Lemos; Mohsen Iskander; Bob Freeman; A S Arunkalaivanan; Alois Martan; Olanrewaju Sorinola; Diaa Rizk; Michael Halaska; Grzegorz Surkont; Carlos Medina; Jose Carlos Conceicao; Jeffrey E Korte Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2011-03-23 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: V Bjelic-Radisic; T Aigmueller; O Preyer; G Ralph; I Geiss; G Müller; P Riss; P Klug; M Konrad; G Wagner; M Medl; W Umek; P Lozano; K Tamussino; A Tammaa Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2014-02-12 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Lin Li Ow; Yik N Lim; Peter L Dwyer; Debjyoti Karmakar; Christine Murray; Elizabeth Thomas; Anna Rosamilia Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2016-06-20 Impact factor: 2.894