Katherine L Woodburn1, Amr Sherif El Haraki2, Andrew I Sokol1, Robert E Gutman1, Catherine A Matthews3. 1. Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Georgetown University/ MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC, USA. 2. Division of Urogynecology and Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery, Wake Forest Baptist Health, Winston-Salem, NC, USA. 3. Division of Urogynecology and Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery, Wake Forest Baptist Health, Winston-Salem, NC, USA. camatthe@wakehealth.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To compare vaginal mesh exposure rates, adverse events and composite failure within 1 year postoperatively in patients who undergo vaginal hysterectomy with vaginal mesh attachment (TVH) versus laparoscopic hysterectomy with abdominal mesh attachment (TLH) for minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective cohort study is a secondary analysis of data collected retrospectively at one institution and the multicenter randomized control PACT trial. Women were excluded for no follow-up between 9 months and 2 years postoperatively or undergoing concurrent non-urogynecologic procedures. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2019, 182 patients underwent TLH and 132 TVH. There were 15 (4.8%) vaginal mesh exposures: 12 (6.6%) in the TLH and 3 (2.3%) in the TVH group (p = 0.133) with zero mesh erosions. Logistic regression analysis for mesh exposure in the TLH vs. TVH groups controlling for BMI, posterior repair and surgeon training also showed no significant difference (OR 4.8, 95% CI 0.94, 24.8, p = 0.059). The overall intraoperative complication rate was low (19/314, 6.1%) with a higher rate of bladder injury in the TLH group (4.4% vs. 0.8%, p = 0.049). The TLH group had a higher rate of UTI (8.2% vs. 2.3%, p = 0.027) and clean intermittent catheterization (11% vs. 3%, p = 0.009). At 1-year follow-up, there was no difference in composite failure (6%), bulge symptoms (5%) or retreatment (1%) between groups. CONCLUSIONS: At 1 year, there is no significant difference in vaginal mesh exposure rates between vaginal hysterectomy with vaginal mesh attachment and laparoscopic hysterectomy with abdominal mesh attachment. Both groups have equal efficacy with low rates of complications.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To compare vaginal mesh exposure rates, adverse events and composite failure within 1 year postoperatively in patients who undergo vaginal hysterectomy with vaginal mesh attachment (TVH) versus laparoscopic hysterectomy with abdominal mesh attachment (TLH) for minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective cohort study is a secondary analysis of data collected retrospectively at one institution and the multicenter randomized control PACT trial. Women were excluded for no follow-up between 9 months and 2 years postoperatively or undergoing concurrent non-urogynecologic procedures. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2019, 182 patients underwent TLH and 132 TVH. There were 15 (4.8%) vaginal mesh exposures: 12 (6.6%) in the TLH and 3 (2.3%) in the TVH group (p = 0.133) with zero mesh erosions. Logistic regression analysis for mesh exposure in the TLH vs. TVH groups controlling for BMI, posterior repair and surgeon training also showed no significant difference (OR 4.8, 95% CI 0.94, 24.8, p = 0.059). The overall intraoperative complication rate was low (19/314, 6.1%) with a higher rate of bladder injury in the TLH group (4.4% vs. 0.8%, p = 0.049). The TLH group had a higher rate of UTI (8.2% vs. 2.3%, p = 0.027) and clean intermittent catheterization (11% vs. 3%, p = 0.009). At 1-year follow-up, there was no difference in composite failure (6%), bulge symptoms (5%) or retreatment (1%) between groups. CONCLUSIONS: At 1 year, there is no significant difference in vaginal mesh exposure rates between vaginal hysterectomy with vaginal mesh attachment and laparoscopic hysterectomy with abdominal mesh attachment. Both groups have equal efficacy with low rates of complications.
Authors: William B Warner; Sonali Vora; Eric A Hurtado; Jeffrey A Welgoss; Nicolette S Horbach; Walter S von Pechmann Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2012 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: Marie Fidela R Paraiso; Mark D Walters; Raymond R Rackley; Seham Melek; Cathy Hugney Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Catherine A Matthews; Elizabeth J Geller; Barbara R Henley; Kimberly Kenton; Erinn M Myers; Alexis A Dieter; Brent Parnell; Christina Lewicky-Gaupp; Margaret G Mueller; Jennifer M Wu Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2020-08 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Jennifer M Wu; Catherine A Matthews; Mitchell M Conover; Virginia Pate; Michele Jonsson Funk Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Ingrid Nygaard; Linda Brubaker; Halina M Zyczynski; Geoffrey Cundiff; Holly Richter; Marie Gantz; Paul Fine; Shawn Menefee; Beri Ridgeway; Anthony Visco; Lauren Klein Warren; Min Zhang; Susan Meikle Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-05-15 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Lily C Wang; Bashir Al Hussein Al Awamlh; Jim C Hu; Melissa A Laudano; Wesley L Davison; Michael L Schulster; Fujun Zhao; Bilal Chughtai; Richard K Lee Journal: Urology Date: 2015-09-04 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Jasmine Tan-Kim; Shawn A Menefee; Karl M Luber; Charles W Nager; Emily S Lukacz Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2010-09-15 Impact factor: 2.894