Literature DB >> 32524157

Long-term safety and efficacy of laparoscopically placed mesh for apical prolapse.

Gemma Nightingale1, Christian Phillips2,3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Concerns regarding the use of vaginal mesh for prolapse have led to questions about the safety and efficacy of abdominally placed mesh. Mesh procedures for treating apical prolapse have become popular, either a laparoscopic hysteropexy (LSH) for uterine prolapse or a sacrocolpopexy (LSC) for vaginal vault prolapse. Robust long-term safety and efficacy data for these procedures are essential.
METHODS: All patients who had LSH or LSC since 2010 were invited back for face-to-face review and examination. Case notes were reviewed for surgical morbidities and patients were questioned about short- and long-term complications. The Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scale was used to assess prolapse, bladder and bowel symptoms postoperatively.
RESULTS: One hundred twelve patients were included in the review, 93 of whom were examined. The median time since surgery was 6 years (range 1-9 years); 2.7% cases had an intraoperative complication, two conversions to laparotomy and one bladder injury. Overall, 17.3% patients sought medical review postoperatively, with 10.7% having problems with their skin incisions. With regard to mesh safety, there was one case of bowel obstruction requiring resection following LSH and two vaginal mesh exposures following LSC; 97% had stage 1 or less apical prolapse at long-term follow-up and 79.6% reported symptoms of prolapse to be 'much better' or 'very much better' on the PGI-I scale.
CONCLUSIONS: This study shows excellent long-term results from LSC and LSH with comprehensive follow-up, demonstrating a very low and acceptable level of intraoperative, short- and long-term complications.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Apical prolapse; Laparoscopic; Mesh; Sacrocolpopexy; Sacrohysteropexy; Safety

Year:  2020        PMID: 32524157     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-020-04374-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urogynecol J        ISSN: 0937-3462            Impact factor:   2.894


  7 in total

1.  Long-term follow-up of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: comparison of two different techniques used in urology and gynecology.

Authors:  Adnan Orhan; Kemal Ozerkan; Hakan Vuruskan; Gokhan Ocakoglu; Isil Kasapoglu; Bahadir Koşan; Gurkan Uncu
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-01-09       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  Mesh-related complications of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.

Authors:  Georgina Baines; Natalia Price; Helen Jefferis; Rufus Cartwright; Simon R Jackson
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-04-30       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Laparoscopic hysteropexy: 10 years' experience.

Authors:  Helen Jefferis; Natalia Price; Simon Jackson
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2017-01-18       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Validation of the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) for urogenital prolapse.

Authors:  Sushma Srikrishna; Dudley Robinson; Linda Cardozo
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 5.  An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction.

Authors:  Bernard T Haylen; Dirk de Ridder; Robert M Freeman; Steven E Swift; Bary Berghmans; Joseph Lee; Ash Monga; Eckhard Petri; Diaa E Rizk; Peter K Sand; Gabriel N Schaer
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.696

6.  Sacrocolpopexy for posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: long-term follow-up.

Authors:  Ester Illiano; Konstantinos Giannitsas; Alessandro Zucchi; Manuel Di Biase; Michele Del Zingaro; Vittorio Bini; Elisabetta Costantini
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-03-18       Impact factor: 2.894

7.  Two parallel, pragmatic, UK multicentre, randomised controlled trials comparing surgical options for upper compartment (vault or uterine) pelvic organ prolapse (the VUE Study): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Cathryn Glazener; Lynda Constable; Christine Hemming; Suzanne Breeman; Andrew Elders; Kevin Cooper; Robert Freeman; Anthony R B Smith; Suzanne Hagen; Alison McDonald; Gladys McPherson; Isobel Montgomery; Mary Kilonzo; Dwayne Boyers; Beatriz Goulao; John Norrie
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 2.279

  7 in total
  2 in total

Review 1.  Mesh exposure following minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: a narrative review.

Authors:  Stephanie Deblaere; Jan Hauspy; Karen Hansen
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 1.932

2.  Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse: long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Anique M J van Oudheusden; Josephine Eissing; Ivon M Terink; Maarten D H Vink; Sander M J van Kuijk; Marlies Y Bongers; Anne-Lotte W M Coolen
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2022-09-16       Impact factor: 1.932

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.