Women with advanced pelvic organ prolapse and levator ani muscle avulsion would significantly benefit from mesh repair surgery

N K L Wong, R Y K Cheung, L L Lee, O Y K Wan, K W Choy, S S C Chan, N K L Wong, R Y K Cheung, L L Lee, O Y K Wan, K W Choy, S S C Chan

Abstract

Objectives: Mesh repair surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) has been suspended in some countries owing to concerns about its associated complications. However, mesh repair has been shown to reduce the risk of prolapse recurrence after surgery. In view of this controversy, our aim was to assess the incidence of subjective and objective recurrence of POP following mesh repair surgery vs native-tissue repair in women with Stage-III or Stage-IV POP.

Methods: This was a prospective observational study of women who presented with Stage-III or Stage-IV POP and received primary prolapse surgery between 2013 and 2018. Transperineal ultrasound was performed before the operation and volumes were analyzed offline to assess the presence of levator ani muscle (LAM) avulsion. All women were counseled on either mesh repair or native-tissue reconstruction. The mesh-repair group was followed up for up to 5 years and the native-tissue-repair group for up to 2 years after the operation. Prolapse symptoms and POP quantification (POP-Q) staging were assessed at follow-up. Subjective recurrence of POP was defined as symptoms of prolapse (vaginal bulge sensation or dragging sensation) reported by the patient. Objective recurrence was defined as POP-Q ≥ Stage II. The subjective and objective recurrences of prolapse were compared between women with and those without mesh use. Multivariate regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for the recurrence of POP.

Results: A total of 154 Chinese women with Stage-III or Stage-IV prolapse were recruited. Of these, 104 (67.5%) underwent mesh repair (transabdominal in 57 women and transvaginal in 47 women) and 50 (32.5%) had native-tissue repair surgery. Ninety-five (61.7%) women had LAM avulsion. Both the subjective POP recurrence rate (4.8% vs 20.0%; P = 0.003) and the objective recurrence rate (20.2% vs 46.0%; P = 0.001) were significantly lower in the mesh-repair group than in the native-tissue-repair group. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, mesh repair was associated significantly with a reduced risk of subjective recurrence (odds ratio (OR), 0.20 (95% CI, 0.07-0.63)) and of objective recurrence (OR, 0.16 (95% CI, 0.07-0.55)) of prolapse. On subgroup analysis of women with LAM avulsion, mesh repair significantly reduced the risk of subjective recurrence (OR, 0.24 (95% CI, 0.07-0.87)) and objective recurrence (OR, 0.23 (95% CI, 0.09-0.57)) of POP. The incidence of mesh-related complications was low, and mesh exposure could be treated conservatively or by minor surgery.

Conclusions: Mesh repair surgery, compared with native-tissue repair, was associated with a 5-fold reduction in the risk of subjective recurrence and a 6-fold reduction in the risk of objective recurrence of prolapse in women with Stage-III or Stage-IV POP. In women with concomitant LAM avulsion, mesh repair surgery was associated with a 4-fold reduction in both objective and subjective recurrence of POP. The rate of mesh-related complications was low, and mesh exposure could be treated conservatively or by minor surgery. The benefit of mesh surgery for these high-risk women appears to outweigh the risks of mesh complications, and it could be a treatment option for this group of women. © 2020 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Keywords: Chinese women; levator ani muscle avulsion; mesh repair; pelvic organ prolapse; primary prolapse surgery; transperineal ultrasound.

© 2020 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

References

REFERENCES

    1. Handa VL, Garrett E, Hendrix S, Gold E, Robbins J. Progression and remission of pelvic organ prolapse: A longitudinal study of menopausal women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 190: 27-32.
    1. Hendrix SL, Clark A, Nygaard I, Aragaki A, Barnabei V, Mctiernan A. Pelvic organ prolapse in the Women's Health Initiative: gravity and gravidity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186: 1160-1166.
    1. Schwertner-Tiepelmann N, Thakar R, Sultan AH, Tunn R. Obstetric levator ani muscle injuries: current status. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012; 39: 372-383.
    1. Chan SSC, Cheung RYK, Yiu AKW, Lee LLL, Pang AWL, Choy KW, Leung TY, Chung TKH. Prevalence of levator ani muscle injury in Chinese women after first delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012; 39: 704-709.
    1. Chung MY, Wan OY, Cheung RY, Chung TK, Chan SS. Prevalence of levator ani muscle injury and health-related quality of life in primiparous Chinese women after instrumental delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 45: 728-733.
    1. Wong V, Shek K, Rane A, Goh J, Krause H, Dietz HP. Is levator avulsion a predictor of cystocele recurrence following anterior vaginal mesh placement? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 42: 230-234.
    1. Cheung RYK, Lee JHS, Lee LL, Chung TKH, Chan SSC. Levator ani muscle avulsion is a risk factor for expulsion within 1 year of vaginal pessary placed for pelvic organ prolapse. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 50: 776-780.
    1. Benson JT, Lucente V, McClellan E. Vaginal versus abdominal reconstructive surgery for the treatment of pelvic support defects: a prospective randomized study with long-term outcome evaluation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 175: 1418-1421; discussion 1421-1422.
    1. Lane FE. Repair of posthysterectomy vaginal-vault prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 1962; 20: 72-77.
    1. Jonsson Funk M, Edenfield AL, Pate V, Visco AG, Weidner AC, Wu JM. Trends in use of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 208: 79.e1-7.
    1. Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Christmann-Schmid C, Haya N, Marjoribanks J. Transvaginal mesh or grafts compared with native tissue repair for vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 2: CD012079.
    1. Svabik K, Martan A, Masata J, El-Haddad R, Hubka P. Comparison of vaginal mesh repair with sacrospinous vaginal colpopexy in the management of vaginal vault prolapse after hysterectomy in patients with levator ani avulsion: a randomized controlled trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 43: 365-371.
    1. Abed H, Rahn DD, Lowenstein L, Balk EM, Clemons JL, Rogers RG. Incidence and management of graft erosion, wound granulation, and dyspareunia following vaginal prolapse repair with graft materials: a systematic review. Int Urogynecol J 2011; 22: 789-798.
    1. Sokol AI, Iglesia CB, Kudish BI, Gutman RE, Shveiky D, Bercik R, Sokol ER. One-year objective and functional outcomes of a randomized clinical trial of vaginal mesh for prolapse. Am J Obstet and Gynecol 2012; 206: 86.e1-9.
    1. : FDA Public Health Notification: Serious Complications Associated with Transvaginal Placement of Surgical Mesh in Repair of Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Stress Urinary Incontinence. Oct 2008. [accessed May 19, 2020].
    1. : Urogynecologic surgical mesh: update on the safety and effectiveness of transvaginal placement for pelvic organ prolapse. Jul 2011. . [accessed May 19, 2020]
    1. Haylen BT, Maher CF, Barber MD, Camargo S, Dandolu V, Digesu A, Goldman HB, Huser M, Milani AL, Moran PA, Schaer GN, Withagen MI. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) / International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Neurourol Urodyn 2016; 35: 137-168.
    1. Dietz HP. Pelvic floor ultrasound: a review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010; 202: 321 - 334.
    1. Dietz HP, Bernardo MJ, Kirby A. Shek KL. Minimal criteria for the diagnosis of avulsion of the puborectalis muscle by tomographic ultrasound. Int Urogynecol J 2011; 22: 699-704.
    1. Zhuang RR, Song YF, Chen ZQ, Ma M, Huang HJ, Chen JH, Li YM. Levator avulsion using a tomographic ultrasound and magnetic resonance-based model. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011; 205: 232.e1-8.
    1. AIUM/IUGA practice parameter for the performance of urogynecological ultrasound examinations: Developed in collaboration with the ACR, the AUGS, the AUA, and the SRU. Int Urogynecol J 2019; 30: 1389-1400.
    1. Friedman T, Eslick GD, Dietz HP. Risk factors for prolapse recurrence: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J 2017; 29: 13-21.
    1. Cheung RY, Chan SC, Lee LL. Risk factors for recurrent prolapse after pelvic organ prolapse surgery. (Abstract poster). 2014 IUGA 39th Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, USA.
    1. Cheung RYK, Shek KL, Chan SSC, Chung TKH, Dietz HP. Pelvic floor muscle biometry and pelvic organ mobility in East Asian and Caucasian nulliparae. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 45: 599-604.
    1. Cheung RYK, Chan SSC, Shek KL, Chung TKH, Dietz HP. Pelvic organ prolapse in Caucasian and East Asian women: a comparative study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2019; 53: 541-545.
    1. Rodrigo N, Wong V, Shek KL, Martin A, Dietz HP. The use of 3-dimensional ultrasound of the pelvic floor to predict recurrence risk after pelvic reconstructive surgery. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2014; 54: 206-211.
    1. Vergeldt TF, van Kuijk SM, Notten KJ, Kluivers KB, Weemhoff M. Anatomical cystocele recurrence: development and internal validation of a prediction model. Obstet Gynecol 2016; 127: 341-347.
    1. Ali S, Han HC, Lee LC. A prospective randomized trial using Gynemesh PS (trademark) for the repair of anterior vaginal wall prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2006; 17 (Suppl 2): 221.
    1. Qatawneh A, Al-Kazaleh F, Saleh S, Thekrallah F, Bata M, Sumreen I, Al-Mustafa M. Transvaginal cystocele repair using tension-free polypropylene mesh at the time of sacrospinous colpopexy for advanced uterovaginal prolapse: a prospective randomised study. Gynecol Surg 2013; 10: 79-85.
    1. Lamblin G, Van-Nieuwenhuyse A, Chabert P, Lebail-Carval K, Moret S, Mellier G. A randomized controlled trial comparing anatomical and functional outcome between vaginal colposuspension and transvaginal mesh. Int Urogynecol J 2014; 25: 961-970.
    1. dos Reis Brandão da Silveira S, Haddad JM, Jármy-Di Bella Z, Nastri F, Kawabata M, Silva Carramão S, da Silva Carramão S, Alves Rodrigues C, Chada Baracat E, Pedro Flores Auge A. Multicenter, randomized trial comparing native vaginal tissue repair and synthetic mesh repair for genital prolapse surgical treatment. Int Urogynecol J 2015; 26: 335-342.
    1. : FDA's Activities: Urogynecologic Surgical Mesh. [accessed 23 February 2020]
    1. Chapple CR, Cruz F, Deffieux X, Milani AL, Arlandis S, Artibani W, Bauer RM, Burkhard F, Cardozo L, Castro-Diaz D, Cornu JN, Deprest J, Gunnemann A, Gyhagen M, Heesakkers J, Koelbl H, MacNeil S, Naumann G, Roovers JWR, Salvatore S, Sievert KD, Tarcan T, Van der Aa F, Montorsi F, Wirth M, Abdel-Fattah M. Consensus Statement of the European Urology Association and the European Urogynaecological Association on the Use of Implanted Materials for Treating Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Stress Urinary Incontinence. Eur Urol 2017; 72: 424-431.
    1. Skoczylas LC, Turner LC, Wang L, Winger DG, Shepherd JP. Changes in prolapse surgery trends relative to FDA notifications regarding vaginal mesh. Int Urogynecol J 2013; 25: 471-477.
    1. Warembourg S, Labaki M, Tayrac RD, Costa P, Fatton B. Reoperations for mesh-related complications after pelvic organ prolapse repair: 8-year experience at a tertiary referral center. Int Urogynecol J 2017; 28: 1139-1151.
    1. Wan OY, Chan SS, Cheung RY, Chung TK. Mesh-related complications from reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse in Chinese patients in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Med J 2018; 24: 369-377.
    1. Lo TS, Pue LB, Tan YL, Wu PY. Long-term outcomes of synthetic transobturator nonabsorbable anterior mesh versus anterior colporrhaphy in symptomatic, advanced pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Int Urogynecol J 2014; 25: 257-264.

Source: PubMed

Спонсоры и соавторы

Заболевания

Медикаментозные вмешательства

Подписаться