Surgical management of a vaginally placed mesh eroded into the urethra

B Clarke,A Davenport,S Shridhar,R Gutman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2024.02.210

IF: 9.8

2024-03-22

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abstract:Urinary tract mesh erosions are a rare but known complication of vaginal mesh procedures. Bladder erosions are more common but urethral erosions have been described.

obstetrics & gynecology

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Removal of Mid-Urethral Mesh Slings Eroded into the Bladder

Shreeya Popat,Gjanje Smith-Mathus,Alvaro Lucioni,Una J Lee,Una J. Lee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2023.12.020

IF: 2.633

2024-01-01

Urology

Abstract:INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Depending on the indication, there are multiple surgical approaches for the removal of mid-urethral mesh slings (MUS): transvaginal, endoscopic, open abdominal, and robotic. We demonstrate the robotic approach to treat MUS that have eroded into the bladder. The robotic approach offers excellent exposure, visualization, and accessibility. Compared to endoscopic approaches, the entire arm of the sling can be removed from the bladder wall, the bladder repaired, and the foreign body completely eliminated. Robotic MUS excision is ideal in patients who would be best served by maximal removal of the mesh from the bladder to prevent future complications.METHODS: In this video, we display 2 different cases showing 2 unique approaches to robotic MUS excision depending on the location of mesh erosion: 1. If a retropubic sling is eroded through the anterior bladder, we begin by dropping the bladder and entering the space of Retzius to locate the mesh arm. 2. If the sling is eroded into the posterior bladder, a cystotomy is made on the anterior dome to visualize the posterior bladder wall.RESULTS: Once the mesh is identified, we follow the mesh graft carefully and dissect it away from surrounding tissues. The dissection is immediately close to the mesh, without fragmenting it, to allow for complete excision and protection of adjacent critical structures. The surgical principles and instrument techniques of robotic mesh excision mirror those utilized for transvaginal mesh excision. Complications of this surgical approach include a urinary leak that may require prolonged catheterization or re-operation and recurrent stress urinary incontinence, in addition to typical operative risks.CONCLUSION: For treatment of mesh erosion into the bladder, a robotic approach offers excellent visualization, is feasible, and well-tolerated. Compared to fragmenting the mesh using an endoscopic approach, the robotic approach has the advantage of excising the mesh definitively and preventing future recurrences of mesh erosion. Properly selected patients should be offered the robotic approach to mesh excision.

urology & nephrology
Robotic Excision of Intravesical Mesh Following Transvaginal Mesh-Based Prolapse Repair

Gabriela F Sarriera Valentin,Francis A Jefferson,Katherine T Anderson,Brian J Linder

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-024-05871-8

Abstract:Introduction and hypothesis: We describe the surgical management of intravesical mesh perforation following transvaginal mesh surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Methods: A 73-year-old woman presented with intravesical mesh perforation 17 years following transvaginal mesh-based prolapse repair at an outside hospital. The patient presented with intermittent hematuria and recurrent urinary tract infections. Cystoscopy demonstrated an approximately 3-cm area of intravesical mesh with associated stone spanning from the bladder neck through the left trigone and ureteral orifice. A robotic-assisted transvesical mesh excision and left ureteroneocystostomy was carried out. Robotic-assisted repair was performed transvesically via transverse bladder dome cystotomy. Dissection was carried out circumferentially around the mesh in the vesicovaginal plane, including a 1-cm margin of healthy tissue. The eroded mesh was excised, and the vaginal wall and bladder were closed with running absorbable sutures. Given the location of the mesh excision and repair, a left ureteral reimplantation was performed. The transverse cystotomy was closed and retrograde bladder filling with methylene blue-stained saline confirmed watertight repairs, with no vaginal extravasation. Results: The patient was discharged the following morning and had an uneventful recovery, including transurethral indwelling catheter removal at 2 weeks after CT cystogram and subsequent ureteral stent removal at 6 weeks postoperatively. At 2-month follow-up she had no new urinary symptoms or obstruction of the ureteral reimplantation on renal ultrasound. Conclusions: A robotic-assisted approach is a feasible option for managing transvaginal prolapse mesh perforation into the bladder. Pelvic surgeons must be well equipped to handle transvaginal mesh complications in a patient-specific manner.
Intestinal Erosion Caused by Meshoma Displacement: A Case Report

Jin-Feng Wu,Jian Chen,Fang Hong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v15.i1.114

2023-01-01

World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery

Abstract:BACKGROUND A meshoma formation and erosion to the small intestine is rare. Herein, we report one case of a meshoma that was not treated early; causing it to displace and erode the small intestine, with infection, complete control of symptoms was achieved after removal of the infected patch mass, no recurrence of hernia after 2 years of follow-up.CASE SUMMARY A 62-year-old male patient presented with recurrent abdominal pain repeatedly for 1 wk, which has worsened 2 d before admition, accompanied by fever. Five years before presentation he underwent right inguinal hernia Plug and patch repair approach. Two years ago, a computed tomography scan revealed a right lower abdominal mass with soft tissue density, measuring approximately 30 mm × 17 mm, which was diagnosed as meshoma that was not treated. The patient had poorly controlled diabetes in the past year.CONCLUSION The formation of meshoma is rare, and that if not treated in time it might erode and require resection of the involved organ.
Case Report of Sigmoid Colon Perforation and Colocutaneous Fistula Due to Retropubic Midurethral Sling Placement for Stress Urinary Incontinence.

Xiao Huang,Hai Jiang,Liping Xie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-020-00600-x

2020-01-01

BMC Urology

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Sigmoid bowel perforation is a very rare and serious complication of the retropubic tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) procedure for female stress urinary incontinence. The complication can be avoided with the use of the correct manipulation technique.CASE PRESENTATION:A 75-year-old female patient underwent a retropubic TVT procedure in the local hospital for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. The procedure was smooth. Two weeks after surgery, the patient began to complain of fever and bloody, purulent discharge from the left suprapubic skin wound. During a 4-month period after surgery, she was admitted to the local hospital 4 times for similar infection symptoms. The infections were temporarily controlled with antibiotic administration. The reason for the refractory infection of the left suprapubic skin wound was not identified until a foreign TVT mesh was found in the sigmoid colon via a colonoscopy. We diagnosed that the TVT mesh caused a sigmoid colon perforation that led to colocutaneous fistula. An exploratory laparotomy revealed that the TVT tape perforated into and out of the sigmoid colon. An 8-cm long left part of mesh was removed. Two ruptures of sigmoid colon were mended without the need for bowel resection. At the 4-years follow-up after laparotomy, the patient was doing well and still continent.CONCLUSIONS:Urologists and gynecologists should be aware of the possibility of colon bowel injury in SUI patients with prior sling surgeries. Patient having recurrent suprapubic cutaneous infection may have high degree of suspicion of colon injury after TVT sling. The passage of the retropubic space procedure should be slow and always along the pubic bone according to the anatomy.
A new treatment of an intravesical eroded mesh after TVM: 3 mm trocar-assisted cystoscopic approach

Shen-Tao Lu,Ming-Bo Liu,Lu-Bin Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-022-05128-2

2022-03-12

International Urogynecology Journal

Abstract:Introduction and hypothesisTo present a novel technique to remove intravesical eroded mesh through a 3-mm trocar-assisted cystoscopy.MethodsFirst, a 3-mm trocar was inserted into the bladder under ultrasound guidance after the bladder had been infused with 600 ml normal saline. Second, we inserted the forceps through the trocar into the bladder and pulled the mesh through the 3-mm trocar. Last, cystoscopic scissors were used to remove the eroded mesh completely.ResultsThe patient was managed adequately in the inpatient department. The urethral catheter was left in situ for 3 days, and the patient was discharged within 5 days.ConclusionSurgery under 3-mm trocar-assisted cystoscopy offers the advantage of lower risk of morbidity and complications compared to other surgical techniques. It is an effective and feasible procedure for treatment of synthetic mesh erosion into the bladder after TVM surgery.

urology & nephrology,obstetrics & gynecology
Transvaginal mesh technique for pelvic organ prolapse repair: mesh exposure management and risk factors

Pierre Collinet,Franck Belot,Philippe Debodinance,Edouard Ha Duc,Jean-Philippe Lucot,Michel Cosson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-005-0003-8

2005-10-15

International Urogynecology Journal

Abstract:Prosthetic reinforcement in the surgical repair of pelvic prolapse by the vaginal approach is not devoid of tolerability-related problems such as vaginal erosion. The purposes of our study are to define the risk factors for exposure of the mesh material, to describe advances and to recommend a therapeutic strategy. Two hundred and seventy-seven patients undergoing surgery due to pelvic prolapse with transvaginal mesh technique were included in a continuous, retrospective study between January 2002 and December 2003. Thirty-four cases of mesh exposure were observed within the 2 months following surgery, which represents an incidence of 12.27%. All the patients were medically treated, nine of whom were found to have completely healed during the check-up performed at 2 months. In contrast, 25 patients required partial mesh exeresis. Risk factors of erosion were concomitant hysterectomy [OR=5.17 (p=10−3)] and inverted T colpotomy [OR=6.06 (p=10−2)]. Two technical guidelines can be defined from this study as regards the surgical procedure required in order to limit mesh exposure via the vaginal route. The uterus must be preserved, and the number and extent of colpotomies needed to insert the mesh must be limited.

urology & nephrology,obstetrics & gynecology
Robotic-assisted intravesical mesh excision following retropubic midurethral sling

Elizabeth J Olive,Brian J Linder

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-024-05736-0

Abstract:Introduction and hypothesis: Intravesical mesh is an uncommon complication following synthetic midurethral sling placement. Management options have included endoscopic techniques such as laser ablation or surgical excision. We present our technique for robotic-assisted excision of intravesical mesh following a retropubic midurethral sling. Methods: The patient is a 66-year-old woman with a remote history of laser ablation of intraurethral mesh after midurethral sling, and persistent symptomatic intravesical mesh with associated stone at the bladder neck and right bladder wall. Robotic excision of the intravesical mesh and stone was performed by entering the space of Retzius, carrying the dissection along the right arm of the retropubic sling, performing two cystotomies to free and remove the mesh, and finally closing the cystotomies in two layers. Results: The patient was discharged on postoperative day 1. A cystogram prior to catheter removal showed no extravasation and a competent bladder neck. She reported no new stress incontinence and had improvement in overactive bladder symptoms. Conclusions: Robotic excision of intravesical mesh after synthetic midurethral sling was safely performed in this patient who had multiple areas of intravesical mesh. Management aspects reported here may be helpful for complex presentations of intravesical mesh.
Laser excision of urethral mesh erosion: a 10-year experience

Caitlin E. Carlton,Jessie Y. Chen,Colby P. Souders,Ramy Goueli,Philippe E. Zimmern

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-024-04822-8

2024-03-12

World Journal of Urology

Abstract:To review our 10-year experience with laser excision for urethral mesh erosion (UME) of mid-urethral slings (MUS).

urology & nephrology
Catheter-induced urethral erosion

Tarun Jindal,Mir Reza Kamal,Soumendra Nath Mandal,Dilip Karmakar

Abstract:Indwelling bladder catheters are often placed when a patient requires voiding assistance. Long-term use of these catheters has been associated with significant morbidity This case presentation describes a complete erosion of the glans, urethra, and penile skin, up to the penoscrotal junction, as an outcome from long-term use of an indwelling bladder catheter. Appropriate nursing interventions can prevent this devastating health care outcome.
Evaluation and Management of Complications after Transvaginal Mesh Repair of Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Wang X.,Chen Y.,Hua K.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2017.08.158

IF: 4.314

2017-01-01

Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology

Abstract:Study Objective: To identify risk factors for complications after mesh-augmented repair for prolapse and evaluate the outcomes of vaginal mesh removal.
Are Surgeons Going to Be Left Holding the Bag? Incisional Hernia Repair and Intra-Peritoneal Non-Absorbable Mesh Implant Complications

Andrew W. Kirkpatrick,Federico Coccolini,Matti Tolonen,Samual Minor,Fausto Catena,Andrea Celotti,Emanuel Gois,Gennaro Perrone,Giuseppe Novelli,Gianluca Garulli,Orestis Ioannidis,Michael Sugrue,Belinda De Simone,Dario Tartaglia,Hanna Lampella,Fernando Ferreira,Luca Ansaloni,Neil G. Parry,Elif Colak,Mauro Podda,Luigi Noceroni,Carlo Vallicelli,Joao Rezende-Netos,Chad G. Ball,Jessica McKee,Ernest E. Moore,Jack Mather

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13041005

IF: 3.9

2024-02-10

Journal of Clinical Medicine

Abstract:Ventral incisional hernias are common indications for elective repair and frequently complicated by recurrence. Surgical meshes, which may be synthetic, bio-synthetic, or biological, decrease recurrence and, resultingly, their use has become standard. While most patients are greatly benefited, mesh represents a permanently implanted foreign body. Mesh may be implanted within the intra-peritoneal, preperitoneal, retrorectus, inlay, or onlay anatomic positions. Meshes may be associated with complications that may be early or late and range from minor to severe. Long-term complications with intra-peritoneal synthetic mesh (IPSM) in apposition to the viscera are particularly at risk for adhesions and potential enteric fistula formation. The overall rate of such complications is difficult to appreciate due to poor long-term follow-up data, although it behooves surgeons to understand these risks as they are the ones who implant these devices. All surgeons need to be aware that meshes are commercial devices that are delivered into their operating room without scientific evidence of efficacy or even safety due to the unique regulatory practices that distinguish medical devices from medications. Thus, surgeons must continue to advocate for more stringent oversight and improved scientific evaluation to serve our patients properly and protect the patient–surgeon relationship as the only rationale long-term strategy to avoid ongoing complications.

medicine, general & internal
Host–biomaterial interactions in mesh complications after pelvic floor reconstructive surgery

Roxanna E. Abhari,Matthew L. Izett-Kay,Hayley L. Morris,Rufus Cartwright,Sarah J. B. Snelling

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41585-021-00511-y

2021-09-20

Nature Reviews Urology

Abstract:Polypropylene (PPL) mesh is widely used in pelvic floor reconstructive surgery for prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. However, some women, particularly those treated using transvaginal PPL mesh placement for prolapse, experience intractable pain and mesh exposure or extrusion. Explanted tissue from patients with complications following transvaginal implantation of mesh is typified by a dense fibrous capsule with an immune cell-rich infiltrate, suggesting that the host immune response has a role in transvaginal PPL mesh complications through the separate contributions of the host (patient), the biological niche within which the material is implanted and biomaterial properties of the mesh. This immune response might be strongly influenced by both the baseline inflammatory status of the patient, surgical technique and experience, and the unique hormonal, immune and microbial tissue niche of the vagina. Mesh porosity, surface area and stiffness also might have an effect on the immune and tissue response to transvaginal mesh placement. Thus, a regulatory pathway is needed for mesh development that recognizes the roles of host and biological factors in driving the immune response to mesh, as well as mandatory mesh registries and the longitudinal surveillance of patients. Complications related to the use of mesh in pelvic floor reconstructive surgery are related to a number of factors. This Review discusses the foreign body response, the biomaterial properties of mesh, the patient-specific and surgical risk factors and the failings in mesh development, all of which have contributed to these complications.

urology & nephrology
Mesh Extraction Surgery and Laser Treatment for Pain After Mid-Urethral Sling Surgery: A Case Series

Nobuo Okui,Machiko Aurora Okui

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.51431

2024-01-01

Cureus

Abstract:Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is the leakage of urine due to abdominal pressure. The primary surgical approach involves the insertion of a mid-urethral sling (MUS) with a mesh, which can occasionally lead to post-operative pain. To address complications, MUS removal is often necessary. We hypothesize that a non-ablative erbium:yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) laser combined with vagina (vaginal erbium laser (VEL)) and urethra (urethra erbium laser (UEL)) treatments could be a post-MUS removal option. A study involving laser treatment started in 2016 for women with recurrent SUI one year after MUS removal who were not affected by pelvic floor muscle exercises and who did not wish to have MUS reinsertion or urethral injection treatment. Five patients (mean age, 54.5 ± 9.35 years) were enrolled, all receiving laser therapy. The visual analog scale (VAS) was used to assess pain as a primary endpoint, and the one-hour pad test was performed for SUI as a secondary endpoint. The mean pain VAS score changed from 8.57 ± 0.69 to 2.29 ± 1.50 (p = 0.00002) after MUS removal. Furthermore, the VAS score was 0 (p = 0.0034) after VEL + UEL. SUI changed from 4.42 ± 2.9 g on the one-hour pad test during MUS insertion to 66.7 ± 39.0 (p = 0.005) after removal. However, after the VEL + UEL treatment, it was 3.71 ± 5.25 g (p = 0.0035). The pathological tissue collected from the five patients at the time of MUS removal surgery had vacuolization in the part where the artificial material was present in the specimen, with foreign-body giant cells proliferated around it. One year after the MUS removal, mucous membrane regeneration was poor, and tissue thickness was thin. One year after the VEL + UEL treatment, the tissue had normalized mucosa, and there was no inflammation. Our study suggests MUS extraction and VEL + UEL as viable options for treating MUS pain in women.
Transvaginal mesh: a historical review and update of the current state of affairs in the United States

Shilpa Iyer,Sylvia M. Botros

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3092-7

2016-08-22

International Urogynecology Journal

Abstract:IntroductionTransvaginal mesh usage has been at the forefront of popular media and academic debate for the past 10 years. Several US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) communications, society statements, and research articles have been written in an attempt to define and articulate the classification system, safety data, and efficacy of this approach to transvaginal surgery. In this review, we explore the history of transvaginal mesh surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP), review FDA and society statements, and research current practice in the United States.MethodsWe searched the English language literature using PubMed for articles related to safety and monitoring of transvaginal mesh and reviewed all FDA publication and notices and gynecology and urogynecology society statements on its use in the United States. We then reviewed 22 articles and grouped them into several sections. ResultsMesh used to augment transvaginal repair of POP was introduced in the United States in 2005 without clinical safety and efficacy data. In the subsequent years of use, both major and minor complications were increasingly reported, leading to several FDA notifications and warnings. The type of mesh used, reporting and classifications systems, and provider usage has varied widely over time.ConclusionWe present a historical review of transvaginal mesh use for pelvic organ prolapse in the United States from 2005 to 2016. There continues to be heated debate among practitioners about balancing the efficacy of mesh use to decrease recurrent prolapse and complications. Research into safety and efficacy, along with tighter FDA regulations, is ongoing.

urology & nephrology,obstetrics & gynecology
Persistent ischiorectal fistula secondary to rectal extrusion of posterior vaginal mesh: Case report

Sonia De-Miguel-Manso,Beatriz De-Andres-Asenjo,Julio Gobernado-Tejedor,Elena Garcia-García,Andrea Vazquez-Fernandez,Cristina Alvarez-Colomo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2024.03.040

Abstract:Introduction and hypothesis: Vaginal mesh has been used for years to try to improve the results of pelvic organ prolapse surgery, but current evidence does not confirm this improvement and instead describes serious and frequent adverse events. Clinical case: 64-year-old patient with rectal extrusion of posterior vaginal mesh placed 8 years earlier, and persistent left ischiorectal fistula refractory to surgery. She required 5 surgeries, carried out jointly between gynecology and general surgery, to solve, firstly, the bilateral perianal abscess secondary to extrusion of the posterior vaginal mesh into the rectum and then the persistent left ischiorectal fistula, despite the removal of the material prosthetic. Finally, the fistula was solved by injection of platelet-rich plasma. Conclusions: Vaginal mesh complications often need a multidisciplinary approach, and treatment may require multiple approaches and more than one surgical procedure. In the case of a persistent fistula refractory to surgery, after removing the mesh, non-invasive regenerative therapies that promote vascular growth and tissue regeneration could be considered such as platelet-rich plasma.
Increased Rate of Mesh Erosion in Breast Cancer Survivors Taking Antiestrogen Therapy

Rosemary Noel Senguttuvan,Shiva Hadadianpour,Nora Ruel,Christopher P. Chung

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/spv.0000000000001436

2024-03-15

Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery

Abstract:There are no current data investigating the relationship between mesh-exposure complications after midurethral sling surgery and antiestrogen therapy.

obstetrics & gynecology
Transvaginal mesh or grafts or native tissue repair for vaginal prolapse

Ellen Yeung,Kaven Baessler,Corina Christmann-Schmid,Nir Haya,Zhuoran Chen,Sheila A Wallace,Alex Mowat,Christopher Maher

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd012079.pub2

IF: 8.4

2024-03-14

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract:Pelvic organ prolapse is the descent of one or more of the pelvic organs (uterus, vaginal apex, bladder, or bowel) into the vagina. In recent years, surgeons have increasingly used grafts in transvaginal repairs. Graft material can be synthetic or biological. The aim is to reduce prolapse recurrence and surpass the effectiveness of traditional native tissue repair (colporrhaphy) for vaginal prolapse. This is a review update; the previous version was published in 2016. To determine the safety and effectiveness of transvaginal mesh or biological grafts compared to native tissue repair or other grafts in the surgical treatment of vaginal prolapse. We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and two clinical trials registers (March 2022 ). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different types of vaginal repair (mesh, biological graft, or native tissue). Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were awareness of prolapse, repeat surgery, and recurrent prolapse on examination. We included 51 RCTs (7846 women). The certainty of the evidence was largely moderate (ranging from very low to moderate). Transvaginal permanent mesh versus native tissue repair Awareness of prolapse at six months to seven years was less likely after mesh repair (risk ratio (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 to 0.95; I 2 = 34%; 17 studies, 2932 women; moderate‐certainty evidence). This suggests that if 23% of women are aware of prolapse after native tissue repair, between 17% and 22% will be aware of prolapse after permanent mesh repair. Rates of repeat surgery for prolapse were lower in the mesh group (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.95; I 2 = 35%; 17 studies, 2485 women; moderate‐certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates of repeat surgery for incontinence (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.59; I 2 = 0%; 13 studies, 2206 women; moderate‐certainty evidence). However, more women in the mesh group required repeat surgery for the combined outcome of prolapse, stress incontinence, or mesh exposure (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.26; I 2 = 54%; 27 studies, 3916 women; low‐certainty evidence). This suggests that if 7.1% of women require repeat surgery after native tissue repair, between 7.6% and 16% will require repeat surgery after permanent mesh repair. The rate of mesh exposure was 11.8% and surgery for mesh exposure was 6.1% in women who had mesh repairs. Recurrent prolapse on examination was less likely after mesh repair (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.55; I 2 = 84%; 25 studies, 3680 women; very low‐certainty evidence). Permanent transvaginal mesh was associated with higher rates of de novo stress incontinence (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.88; I 2 = 0%; 17 studies, 2001 women; moderate‐certainty evidence) and bladder injury (RR 3.67, 95% CI 1.63 to 8.28; I 2 = 0%; 14 studies, 1997 women; moderate‐certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates of de novo dyspareunia (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.79; I 2 = 27%; 16 studies, 1308 women; moderate‐certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference in quality of life outcomes; however, there was substantial heterogeneity in the data. Transvaginal absorbable mesh versus native tissue repair There was no evidence of a difference between the two methods of repair at two years for the rate of awareness of prolapse (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.44; 1 study, 54 women), rate of repeat surgery for prolapse (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.40; 1 study, 66 women), or recurrent prolapse on examination (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.70; 1 study, 66 women). The effect of either form of repair was uncertain for bladder‐related outcomes, dyspareunia, and quality of life. Transvaginal biological graft versus native tissue repair There was no evidence of a difference between the groups at one to three years for the outcome awareness of prolapse (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.56; I 2 = 0%; 8 studies, 1374 women; moderate‐certainty evidence), repeat surgery for prolapse (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.77; I 2 = 0%; 6 studies, 899 women; moderate‐certainty evidence), and recurrent prolapse on examination (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.29; I 2 = 53%; 9 studies, 1278 women; low‐certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between the groups for dyspareunia or quality of life. Transvaginal permanent mesh versus any other permanent mesh or biological graft vaginal repair Sparse reporting of primary outcomes in both comparisons significantly limited any meaningful analysis. While transvaginal permanent mesh is associated with lower rates of awar -Abstract Truncated-

medicine, general & internal
Urostomal ileal conduit complications in association with abdominal wall mesh implantation

L Jakobsson,A Montgomery,J Ingvar,A Löfgren,F Liedberg

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21681805.2021.1986571

Abstract:Objective: Parastomal hernia (PH) in association with an ileal conduit is a common complication that is difficult to treat. Mesh reinforcement has been suggested to improve outcomes; either as prophylaxis or for treatment of a parastomal hernia during abdominal wall reconstruction. Patients and methods: A retrospective study was performed in consecutive patients subjected to mesh implantation between 2000 and 2016 having a concurrent or previous ileal conduit reconstruction. Postoperative and late urostomal complications, as well as hernia occurrence, were ascertained by a chart review of patients' records. Results: A total of 25 patients were included of whom 13 (52%) developed either a urostomal complication, a PH, or both. Complications were caused by mesh erosion in four patients, of which three were diagnosed more than five years after surgery. Four patients developed a urostomal stenosis. One out of eight patients with urostomal complications were subjected to a new ileal conduit reconstruction and another four to other types of revisional surgery. Conclusions: Every second patient with an ileal conduit developed either a local urostomal complication, a PH, or both after abdominal wall mesh reconstruction. A careful and cautious attitude towards the use of mesh in patients with an ileal conduit is suggested.
A Unique Case of Gastric Band Tubing Eroding Into the Vaginal Cuff

Pranav Balakrishnan,Thomas Adams,Darren B Nease,Semeret T Munie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.68427

2024-09-02

Cureus

Abstract:We present here the case of a woman in her 40s with a history of an adjustable gastric band placed a decade ago. After the initial procedure, she had issues with a port-site hernia, mesh placement, and explantation secondary to mesh infection. Her port was removed at the time, with the tubing left in situ with hopes of future salvage. She then presented to her gynecologist with the tubing eroding through her vaginal cuff. This case highlights the importance of having a high index of suspicion in patients with a history of gastric bands given the varying presentation in the event of a complication.
Analysis of British Columbia practice patterns in the management of female stress urinary incontinence with emphasis on mesh use

Lauren Eggenberger,Lauren Walgren,Sara Houlihan,Alexandra Bascom,Katherine Anderson,Kathleen A Martin Ginis,Jennifer A Locke,Kathleen A. Martin Ginis,Jennifer A. Locke

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8536

2024-01-30

Canadian Urological Association Journal

Abstract:Introduction: Female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is common and has a profound impact on quality of life. Suburethral slings are the most common treatment for SUI in this population. These can be placed with synthetic mesh or autologous fascia. Mesh-related complications after midurethral sling procedures are documented in the literature but the risk of complications and reoperation is lower than the use of transvaginal mesh for pelvic organ prolapse repair. In this study, we sought to evaluate local practice patterns of management of female SUI with specific emphasis on mesh use. Methods: A survey created by an expert panel was disseminated to respective provincial societies. Results: Sixty-eight percent of respondents offer midurethral slings in their practice but only 60.6% of these respondents would offer surgical removal of the sling if there were complications, such as mesh erosion or pain. The majority (39.4%) of respondents are performing transobturator slings as compared to retropubic midurethral slings (36.3%) and only 8.5% have removed the leg component associated with the transobturator sling in their practice. Furthermore, compared to most respondents offering midurethral slings (64.8%), only a minority of surgeons offer alternatives: 23.9% of respondents offer periurethral bulking agent injections, 15.5% offer pubovaginal slings, and 12.7% offer retropubic urethropexies. Conclusions: Our study supports that surgeons should continue to review surgical risks and alternative treatment options as part of the surgical consent process. As such, surgeons should be able to offer a variety of surgical approaches to manage female SUI.

urology & nephrology

Surgical management of a vaginally placed mesh eroded into the urethra

Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Removal of Mid-Urethral Mesh Slings Eroded into the Bladder

Robotic Excision of Intravesical Mesh Following Transvaginal Mesh-Based Prolapse Repair

Intestinal Erosion Caused by Meshoma Displacement: A Case Report

Case Report of Sigmoid Colon Perforation and Colocutaneous Fistula Due to Retropubic Midurethral Sling Placement for Stress Urinary Incontinence.

A new treatment of an intravesical eroded mesh after TVM: 3 mm trocar-assisted cystoscopic approach

Transvaginal mesh technique for pelvic organ prolapse repair: mesh exposure management and risk factors

Robotic-assisted intravesical mesh excision following retropubic midurethral sling

Laser excision of urethral mesh erosion: a 10-year experience

Catheter-induced urethral erosion

Evaluation and Management of Complications after Transvaginal Mesh Repair of Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Are Surgeons Going to Be Left Holding the Bag? Incisional Hernia Repair and Intra-Peritoneal Non-Absorbable Mesh Implant Complications

Host–biomaterial interactions in mesh complications after pelvic floor reconstructive surgery

Mesh Extraction Surgery and Laser Treatment for Pain After Mid-Urethral Sling Surgery: A Case Series

Transvaginal mesh: a historical review and update of the current state of affairs in the United States

Persistent ischiorectal fistula secondary to rectal extrusion of posterior vaginal mesh: Case report

Increased Rate of Mesh Erosion in Breast Cancer Survivors Taking Antiestrogen Therapy

Transvaginal mesh or grafts or native tissue repair for vaginal prolapse

Urostomal ileal conduit complications in association with abdominal wall mesh implantation

A Unique Case of Gastric Band Tubing Eroding Into the Vaginal Cuff

Analysis of British Columbia practice patterns in the management of female stress urinary incontinence with emphasis on mesh use