Alexandra I Goodwin1, Jose Torres2, Danielle L O'Shaughnessy3, Peter S Finamore3. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at South Shore University Hospital, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Bay Shore, NY, USA. Agoodwin2@northwell.edu. 2. Department of Urology at Stony Brook University Hospital, Renaissance School of Medicine at Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA. 3. Department of Urogynecology at South Shore University Hospital, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Bay Shore, NY, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Approximately 5% of patients pursue reoperation after sacrocolpopexy (SCP). Reasons for re-operation include recurrence of prolapse, mesh erosion, bowel and bladder dysfunction, and pain. We aim to describe patient presentation, intraoperative findings, and subsequent robotic approach to management of SCP failures and complications. METHODS: This is a case series of patients who underwent abdominal re-exploration after SCP over 7 years at a single institution. Demographic data, previous prolapse surgery, presenting complaint, prolapse stage, operative notes, and outcomes were reviewed. Nineteen patients were identified by CPT codes; ten met inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Seven of the ten patients presented with vaginal bulge, urinary frequency and urgency; four also had stress urinary incontinence. Two patients presented with vaginal bleeding and another with vaginal pain. Operative findings on reoperation for patients who had vaginal bulge included detachment from the vagina or cervix (n = 4, 57%) and the anterior longitudinal ligament (n = 3, 43%). Of these, two had their SCP mesh reattached, and five had SCP mesh removal and replacement. The patients with vaginal bleeding and pain underwent mesh excisions. All ten patients had uncomplicated postoperative courses with resolution of symptoms in most cases. CONCLUSIONS: Prolapse recurrence and complications after SCP have a significant impact on patient quality of life. Recurrent prolapse after SCP theoretically occurs because of mesh detachment from the cervix/vagina, the anterior longitudinal ligament, or disruption/stretching of the mesh. Our case series demonstrates that abdominal re-exploration is feasible and valuable in these rare cases.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Approximately 5% of patients pursue reoperation after sacrocolpopexy (SCP). Reasons for re-operation include recurrence of prolapse, mesh erosion, bowel and bladder dysfunction, and pain. We aim to describe patient presentation, intraoperative findings, and subsequent robotic approach to management of SCP failures and complications. METHODS: This is a case series of patients who underwent abdominal re-exploration after SCP over 7 years at a single institution. Demographic data, previous prolapse surgery, presenting complaint, prolapse stage, operative notes, and outcomes were reviewed. Nineteen patients were identified by CPT codes; ten met inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Seven of the ten patients presented with vaginal bulge, urinary frequency and urgency; four also had stress urinary incontinence. Two patients presented with vaginal bleeding and another with vaginal pain. Operative findings on reoperation for patients who had vaginal bulge included detachment from the vagina or cervix (n = 4, 57%) and the anterior longitudinal ligament (n = 3, 43%). Of these, two had their SCP mesh reattached, and five had SCP mesh removal and replacement. The patients with vaginal bleeding and pain underwent mesh excisions. All ten patients had uncomplicated postoperative courses with resolution of symptoms in most cases. CONCLUSIONS: Prolapse recurrence and complications after SCP have a significant impact on patient quality of life. Recurrent prolapse after SCP theoretically occurs because of mesh detachment from the cervix/vagina, the anterior longitudinal ligament, or disruption/stretching of the mesh. Our case series demonstrates that abdominal re-exploration is feasible and valuable in these rare cases.
Authors: Catherine O Hudson; Gina M Northington; Robert H Lyles; Deborah R Karp Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2014 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.091