Chang Shi1, Ying Zhao1, Qing Hu1, Runqi Gong1, Yitong Yin1, Zhijun Xia2. 1. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, No. 36, Sanhao Street, Heping District, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, China. 2. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, No. 36, Sanhao Street, Heping District, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, China. xiazj_tg@163.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to investigate the relevant factors of pain after transvaginal mesh (TVM) surgery for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse and to analyse the management and relief of the pain. METHODS: A multicentre retrospective study of a clinical database of patients who underwent TVM surgery was conducted, and pain related aspects were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 1855 patients were included in the study. We divided the patients into two groups: pain-free (1805 patients) and pain (50 patients) group. The incidence of pain after TVM surgery was 2.70%, with a median occurrence time of 7.5 months. Pain mainly involved the vagina, perineum, buttocks, groin, inner thighs, and lower abdomen. Excessive intraoperative blood loss (OR = 1.284, 95% CI 0.868-2.401) and postoperative anatomic failure (OR = 1.577, 95% CI 0.952-3.104) were analysed as risk factors with statistical significance. Mesh exposure rate in the pain group was 38%, showing a significant difference between the groups (P < 0.01). Forty patients underwent non-surgical treatment, with a relief rate of 40.0%, 33 patients received surgical treatment, 15 underwent partial mesh removal, and 18 underwent complete mesh removal, with a relief rate of 84.8%. The total relief rate was 88% within all 50 patients suffering from pain. CONCLUSIONS: Excessive intraoperative bleeding and unsatisfactory postoperative anatomic outcomes can increase the risk of postoperative pain; mesh exposure is also associated with the pain. Most patients can get pain relief with proper management, more than half of whom may need mesh removal with differing approach.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to investigate the relevant factors of pain after transvaginal mesh (TVM) surgery for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse and to analyse the management and relief of the pain. METHODS: A multicentre retrospective study of a clinical database of patients who underwent TVM surgery was conducted, and pain related aspects were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 1855 patients were included in the study. We divided the patients into two groups: pain-free (1805 patients) and pain (50 patients) group. The incidence of pain after TVM surgery was 2.70%, with a median occurrence time of 7.5 months. Pain mainly involved the vagina, perineum, buttocks, groin, inner thighs, and lower abdomen. Excessive intraoperative blood loss (OR = 1.284, 95% CI 0.868-2.401) and postoperative anatomic failure (OR = 1.577, 95% CI 0.952-3.104) were analysed as risk factors with statistical significance. Mesh exposure rate in the pain group was 38%, showing a significant difference between the groups (P < 0.01). Forty patients underwent non-surgical treatment, with a relief rate of 40.0%, 33 patients received surgical treatment, 15 underwent partial mesh removal, and 18 underwent complete mesh removal, with a relief rate of 84.8%. The total relief rate was 88% within all 50 patients suffering from pain. CONCLUSIONS:Excessive intraoperative bleeding and unsatisfactory postoperative anatomic outcomes can increase the risk of postoperative pain; mesh exposure is also associated with the pain. Most patients can get pain relief with proper management, more than half of whom may need mesh removal with differing approach.
Entities:
Keywords:
Mesh complications; Pelvic organ prolapse; Postoperative pain; Transvaginal mesh surgery
Authors: Karen P Gold; Renee M Ward; Carl W Zimmerman; Daniel H Biller; Shawn McGuinn; James C Slaughter; Roger R Dmochowski Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2012-03-24 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Bernard T Haylen; Christopher F Maher; Matthew D Barber; Sérgio Camargo; Vani Dandolu; Alex Digesu; Howard B Goldman; Martin Huser; Alfredo L Milani; Paul A Moran; Gabriel N Schaer; Mariëlla I J Withagen Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2016-01-07 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Farzeen Firoozi; Michael S Ingber; Courtenay K Moore; Sandip P Vasavada; Raymond R Rackley; Howard B Goldman Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-03-15 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Cathryn Ma Glazener; Suzanne Breeman; Andrew Elders; Christine Hemming; Kevin G Cooper; Robert M Freeman; Anthony Rb Smith; Fiona Reid; Suzanne Hagen; Isobel Montgomery; Mary Kilonzo; Dwayne Boyers; Alison McDonald; Gladys McPherson; Graeme MacLennan; John Norrie Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-12-21 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Roxanna E Abhari; Matthew L Izett-Kay; Hayley L Morris; Rufus Cartwright; Sarah J B Snelling Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2021-09-20 Impact factor: 14.432