Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 1.927
Filtrar
1.
Urologe A ; 59(1): 65-71, 2020 Jan.
Artigo em Alemão | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31741004

RESUMO

Due to a safety alert issued by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2011 for transvaginal mesh implants to treat female prolapse as a result of numerous reports of complications such as infection, chronic pain, dyspareunia, vaginal erosion, shrinkage and erosion into other organs nearly all industrial products have been withdrawn from the market in the meantime. The United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand extended warnings and prohibitions even on the implantation of midurethral slings (TVT, TOT). In view of these current international controversies regarding the use of implanted materials for the treatment of stress incontinence and prolapse and the lack of clear guidelines for the use of biomaterials, the opinion of the Working Group on Urological Functional Diagnostics and Female Urology should provide clarity. The Opinion is based on the SCENIHR Report of the "European Commission's Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks", the "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" and in compliance with relevant EAU and national guidelines and the opinion of the Association for Urogynaecology and Plastic Pelvic Floor Reconstruction (AGUB eV). In addition, recommendations are given for the future handling of implants of slings and meshes for the treatment of stress incontinence and prolapse from a urologic viewpoint.


Assuntos
Prolapso de Órgão Pélvico/cirurgia , Slings Suburetrais/efeitos adversos , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Incontinência Urinária por Estresse/cirurgia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urológicos/instrumentação , Feminino , Alemanha , Humanos
3.
BJOG ; 127(1): 28-35, 2020 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31541614

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Mesh surgery for stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse can result in complications such as mesh exposure, mesh extrusion, voiding dysfunction, dyspareunia, and pain. There is limited knowledge or guidance on the effective management for mesh-related complications. OBJECTIVE: To determine the best management of mesh complications; a systematic review was conducted as part of the national clinical guideline 'Urinary incontinence (update) and pelvic organ prolapse in women: management'. SEARCH STRATEGY: Search strategies were developed for each indication for referral. SELECTION CRITERIA: Relevant interventions included complete or partial mesh removal, mesh division, and non-surgical treatments such as vaginal estrogen. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Characteristics and outcome data were extracted, and as a result of the heterogeneous nature of the data a narrative synthesis was conducted. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-four studies were included; five provided comparative data and four studies stated the indication for referral. Reported outcomes (including pain, dyspareunia, satisfaction, quality of life, incontinence, mesh exposure, and recurrence) and the reported incidences of these varied widely. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence base is limited in quantity and quality and does not permit firm recommendations to be made on the most effective management for mesh-related complications. Robust data are needed so that mesh complications can be managed effectively in the future. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Systematic review demonstrates that the outcomes following mesh revision surgery are highly variable.


Assuntos
Prolapso de Órgão Pélvico/cirurgia , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Incontinência Urinária por Estresse/cirurgia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Perda Sanguínea Cirúrgica , Dispareunia/etiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Complicações Intraoperatórias/etiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Satisfação do Paciente , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Qualidade de Vida , Recidiva , Disfunções Sexuais Fisiológicas/etiologia , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto Jovem
4.
BJOG ; 127(1): 88-97, 2020 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31544327

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To assess the short-term incidence of serious complications of surgery for urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal cohort study using a surgical registry. SETTING: Thirteen public hospitals in France. POPULATION: A cohort of 1873 women undergoing surgery between February 2017 and August 2018. METHODS: Preliminary analysis of serious complications after a mean follow-up of 7 months (0-18 months), according to type of surgery. Surgeons reported procedures and complications, which were verified by the hospitals' information systems. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Serious complication requiring discontinuation of the procedure or subsequent surgical intervention, life-threatening complication requiring resuscitation, or death. RESULTS: Fifty-two women (2.8%, 95% CI 2.1-3.6%) experienced a serious complication either during surgery, requiring the discontinuation of the procedure, or during the first months of follow-up, necessitating a subsequent reoperation. One woman also required resuscitation; no women died. Of 811 midurethral slings (MUSs), 11 were removed in part or totally (1.4%, 0.7-2.3%), as were two of 391 transvaginal meshes (0.5%, 0.1-1.6%), and four of 611 laparoscopically placed mesh implants (0.7%, 0.2-1.5%). The incidence of serious complications 6 months after the surgical procedure was estimated to be around 3.5% (2.0-5.0%) after MUS alone, 7.0% (2.8-11.3%) after MUS with prolapse surgery, 1.7% (0.0-3.8%) after vaginal native tissue repair, 2.8% (0.9-4.6%) after transvaginal mesh, and 1.0% (0.1-1.9%) after laparoscopy with mesh. CONCLUSIONS: Early serious complications are relatively rare. Monitoring must be continued and expanded to assess the long-term risk associated with mesh use and to identify its risk factors. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Short-term serious complications are rare after surgery for urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse, even with mesh.


Assuntos
Diafragma da Pelve/cirurgia , Prolapso de Órgão Pélvico/cirurgia , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Análise de Variância , Colposcopia/efeitos adversos , Colposcopia/mortalidade , Colposcopia/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , França/epidemiologia , Humanos , Incidência , Complicações Intraoperatórias/etiologia , Complicações Intraoperatórias/mortalidade , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Prolapso de Órgão Pélvico/mortalidade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/mortalidade , Estudos Prospectivos , Sistema de Registros , Slings Suburetrais/efeitos adversos , Slings Suburetrais/estatística & dados numéricos , Telas Cirúrgicas/estatística & dados numéricos , Centros Cirúrgicos/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto Jovem
5.
Int Braz J Urol ; 45(6): 1180-1185, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31808406

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term (5-10 years) outcomes of Minimally Invasive Surgical (MIS) kit insertion with Prolift® (non-absorbable) mesh compared to the use of Prolift M® (partially absorbable), for anterior vaginal wall prolapse repair. STUDY DESIGN: In this retrospective study we compared women undergoing MIS kit Prolift ® insertion (n=90) vs. Prolift M® insertion (n=79) for anterior vaginal wall prolapse repair between 2006 and 2012 at our Institution. A number of 169 women fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. RESULTS: During the study period 128 women (76%) completed full follow-up; of them 58 (73%) following MIS kit Prolift® insertion, and 70 (88%) following MIS kit ProliftM® insertion. There was no signifi cant difference between the Prolift® and Prolift M® regarding parity (3.04 vs. 2.88, p=0.506), presence of hypertension (24.1% vs. 39.1%, p=0.088), diabetes mellitus (3.4% vs. 11.6%, p=0.109), or urinary stress incontinence (39.7% vs. 47.1%, p=0.475). All participants had been diagnosed with POP grade 3 or 4 before the procedure. No significant complications during the procedure or postoperative period were identified in the study groups. The follow-up period was at least five years in duration for both groups. Both groups were comparable according to questionnaires focused on function and satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing MIS kit Prolift® and Prolift M® insertion for anterior vaginal wall prolapse repair had comparable early and late postoperative outcomes. No differences in patient's function and satisfaction between the two groups were identified. According to our fi ndings, there is no superiority to either of the two studied mesh devices.


Assuntos
Implantes Absorvíveis , Telas Cirúrgicas , Prolapso Uterino/cirurgia , Implantes Absorvíveis/efeitos adversos , Idoso , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Satisfação do Paciente , Diafragma da Pelve , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estatísticas não Paramétricas , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Resultado do Tratamento , Prolapso Uterino/complicações , Prolapso Uterino/fisiopatologia
6.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 98(49): e18252, 2019 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31804356

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Lumbar spondylodiscitis is a rare and severe complication of laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy with a polypropylene mesh. However, a case of lumbar spondylodiscitis following laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy has not been reported so far. We present a case of lumbar spondylodiscitis following laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy with a mesh. We also discuss 33 cases of lumbar spondylodiscitis following sacral colpopexy and (or) rectopexy with a mesh. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 46-year-old woman with 3 previous vaginal deliveries underwent laparoscopic mesh sacrohysteropexy for stage III uterine prolapse. One month after surgery, the patient developed persistent symptoms, such as stiffness of the lumbosacral portion, low back pain (LBP), persistent swelling, pain between the right iliac crest and the buttock, inability to bend down, and pain in the right lower limb. Symptoms were alleviated by a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. However, in the last 7 days, symptoms worsened and she was unable to stand or walk. The patient had very limited leg mobility. DIAGNOSIS: Blood routine examination, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the lumbar spine indicated lumbar pyogenic spondylodiscitis. INTERVENTIONS: Removal of mesh and hysterectomy via laparoscopy were performed immediately, and antibiotics were given simultaneously. However, on the basis of MRI findings and persistent symptoms, debridement, laminectomy, spinal canal decompression, bone grafting, and internal fixation via pedicle screw placement were performed 5 months after laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy. OUTCOMES: All symptoms were alleviated 5 days after the operation. The patient could stand in the erect position and raise her lower limbs within 2 weeks. She could resume her normal activities within 2 months after the operation, and her X-ray appeared normal. CONCLUSION: Persistent LBP and radiating pain may be the signals of lumbar spondylodiscitis. MRI is the gold standard diagnostic examination for lumbar spondylodiscitis. Awareness of symptoms, such as LBP and radiating pain symptoms, timely diagnosis, mesh removal, and referral to orthopedists are important to prevent more severe complications. Surgical practice needs to be improved further and any other infections should be treated immediately as the most likely causes of lumbar spondylodiscitis are related to the mesh and other infections.


Assuntos
Discite/etiologia , Discite/cirurgia , Vértebras Lombares , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/cirurgia , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Prolapso Uterino/cirurgia , Parafusos Ósseos , Transplante Ósseo , Desbridamento , Descompressão Cirúrgica , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Discite/diagnóstico , Feminino , Humanos , Laminectomia , Imagem por Ressonância Magnética , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/diagnóstico
7.
Curr Urol Rep ; 20(11): 70, 2019 Oct 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31612341

RESUMO

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Due to recent concerns over the use of synthetic mesh in pelvic floor reconstructive surgery, there has been a renewed interest in the utilization of non-synthetic repairs for pelvic organ prolapse. The purpose of this review is to review the current literature regarding pelvic organ prolapse repairs performed without the utilization of synthetic mesh. RECENT FINDINGS: Native tissue repairs provide a durable surgical option for pelvic organ prolapse. Based on recent findings of recently performed randomized clinical trials with long-term follow-up, transvaginal native tissue repair continues to play a role in the management of pelvic organ prolapse without the added risk associated with synthetic mesh. In 2019, the FDA called for manufacturers of synthetic mesh for transvaginal mesh to stop selling and distributing their products in the USA. Native tissue and non-synthetic pelvic organ prolapse repairs provide an efficacious alternative without the added risk inherent to the utilization of transvaginal mesh. A recent, multicenter, randomized clinical trial demonstrated no clear advantage to the utilization of synthetic mesh. Furthermore, transvaginal native tissue repairs have demonstrated good long-term efficacy, particularly when anatomic success is not the sole metric used to define surgical success.


Assuntos
Procedimentos Cirúrgicos em Ginecologia/métodos , Prolapso de Órgão Pélvico/cirurgia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Reconstrutivos/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Ligamentos/cirurgia , Tratamentos com Preservação do Órgão , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Técnicas de Sutura , Resultado do Tratamento
8.
Am Surg ; 85(10): 1113-1117, 2019 Oct 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31657305

RESUMO

Although recommendations help guide surgeons' mesh choice in abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR), financial and institutional pressures may play a bigger role. Standardization of an AWR algorithm may help reduce costs and change mesh preferences. We performed a retrospective review of high- and low-risk patients who underwent inpatient AWR between 2014 and 2016. High risk was defined as immunosuppression and/or history of infection/contamination. Patients were stratified by the type of mesh as biologic/biosynthetic or synthetic. These cohorts were analyzed for outcome, complications, and cost. One hundred twelve patients underwent complex AWR. The recurrence rate at two years was not statistically different between high- and low-risk cohorts. No significant difference was found in the recurrence rate between biologic and synthetic meshes when comparing both high- and low-risk cohorts. The average cost of biologic mesh was $9,414.80 versus $524.60 for synthetic. The estimated cost saved when using synthetic mesh for low-risk patients was $295,391.20. In conclusion, recurrence rates for complex AWR seem to be unrelated to mesh selection. There seems to be an excess use of biologic mesh in low-risk patients, adding significant cost. Implementing a critical process to evaluate indications for biologic mesh use could decrease costs without impacting the quality of care, thus improving the overall value of AWR.


Assuntos
Parede Abdominal/cirurgia , Materiais Biocompatíveis/economia , Redução de Custos , Sobremedicalização/economia , Telas Cirúrgicas/economia , Algoritmos , Materiais Biocompatíveis/efeitos adversos , Estudos de Coortes , Humanos , Hospedeiro Imunocomprometido , Sobremedicalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Readmissão do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Recidiva , Reoperação/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Telas Cirúrgicas/estatística & dados numéricos
9.
Am Surg ; 85(10): 1159-1161, 2019 Oct 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31657315

RESUMO

There are conflicting views regarding techniques for repair of small umbilical hernias (UHs). Here, we compare the recurrence rate in primary repair with that reported for mesh repair by examining a single surgeon's practice at a large medical center with a comprehensive electronic medical record. A six-year retrospective review of primary UH repairs between January 2012 and December 2017 at Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles Medical Center was undertaken. Patients were identified through a database search of the electronic medical record. The primary endpoint of UH recurrence was examined; median follow-up was 3.4 years. Primary, elective UH repair was performed in 244 patients; 71 per cent of hernias were small (<2 cm). The total number of recurrences was seven (3%). The t test analysis showed significant differences in the average size of hernia defects between those with recurrences (2 cm) and those without (1.4 cm), P < 0.05. Primary repair affords low infection and recurrence rates, comparable to those reported for mesh repair. Our single-surgeon/large-volume study contributes to the evidence that primary UH repair is a safe and durable method, with low risk of recurrence. The use of absorbable monofilament suture, and selection for lower BMI and smaller hernia sizes proved to be effective.


Assuntos
Hérnia Umbilical/cirurgia , Herniorrafia/estatística & dados numéricos , Telas Cirúrgicas/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Índice de Massa Corporal , California , Feminino , Hérnia Umbilical/patologia , Herniorrafia/efeitos adversos , Herniorrafia/métodos , Hospitais com Alto Volume de Atendimentos/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Recidiva , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fumantes/estatística & dados numéricos , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Suturas , Técnicas de Fechamento de Ferimentos
10.
Dis Colon Rectum ; 62(12): 1512-1517, 2019 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31569096

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There has been increasing concern and scrutiny in the use of mesh for certain pelvic organ prolapse procedures. However, mesh erosion was often associated with sites of suture fixation of the mesh to the rectum or vagina. Thus, in response to this finding, we replaced our suture material with absorbable monofilament suture. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the rates of mesh-related complications after laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy, according to the type of suture used in fixation of mesh. DESIGN: This was retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: This study was performed at a high-volume, tertiary care center. It was conducted using a prospective database including patients who underwent laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy over a 7-year period. PATIENTS: A total of 495 cases were included; 296 (60%) laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexies were performed using a nonabsorbable suture compared with 199 (40%) with an absorbable suture in a case-matched analysis. In addition, 151 cases of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy with nonabsorbable were matched based on age, sex, and time of follow-up, with an equal number of patients using absorbable monofilament suture. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Primary outcome was symptomatic mesh erosion after rectopexy. Secondary outcomes included other mesh-related complications and/or reoperations. RESULTS: The erosion rate was 2% (6/495) in the nonabsorbable suture group, including 4 erosions into the rectum and 2 into the vagina. There was no erosion in the group with absorbable suture. This difference was maintained after matching: after a median follow-up of 6 (12) months, there was no erosion in the absorbable suture group versus 3.3% erosion (n = 5) in the nonabsorbable suture group (p = 0.03). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective design. CONCLUSIONS: Mesh-related complications are reduced using absorbable sutures compared with nonabsorbable sutures when performing laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy with synthetic mesh without an increase in rectopexy failures. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B49. IMPACTO DEL TIPO DE SUTURA EN LA TASA DE EROSIóN DESPUéS DE LA RECTOPEXIA VENTRAL LAPAROSCóPICA CON MALLA: UN ESTUDIO DE CASOS EMPAREJADOS: Ha habido una creciente preocupación y escrutinio en el uso de la malla para ciertos procedimientos de prolapso de órganos pélvicos. Sin embargo, la erosión de la malla a menudo se asoció con sitios de fijación de sutura de la malla al recto o la vagina. Por lo tanto, en respuesta a este hallazgo, reemplazamos nuestro material de sutura con sutura de monofilamento absorbible.Comparar las tasas de complicaciones relacionadas con la malla después de la rectopexia laparoscópica de malla ventral, de acuerdo al tipo de sutura utilizada en la fijación de la malla.Este fue un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.Este estudio se realizó en un centro de atención de tercer nivel de alto volumen. Se realizó utilizando una base de datos prospectiva que incluía pacientes que se sometieron a una rectopexia de malla ventral laparoscópica durante un período de 7 años.Se incluyeron un total de 495 casos; 296 (60%) rectopexias de malla ventral laparoscópica utilizando una sutura no reabsorbible en comparación con 199 (40%) con una sutura absorbible en un análisis de casos emparejados. Además, 151 casos de rectopexia ventral laparoscópica con malla no absorbible se emparejaron según la edad, el sexo y el tiempo de seguimiento con un número igual de pacientes que usaban sutura de monofilamento absorbible.La medida de resultado primaria fue la erosión sintomática de la malla después de la rectopexia. La medida de resultado secundarias incluyeron otras complicaciones y/o reoperaciones relacionadas con la malla.La tasa de erosión fue del 2% (6/495) en el grupo de sutura no absorbible; 4 erosiones en el recto y 2 en la vagina. No hubo erosión en el grupo con sutura absorbible. Esta diferencia se mantuvo después del emparejamiento: después de una mediana de seguimiento de 6 (12) meses, no hubo erosión en el grupo de sutura absorbible versus 3.3% de erosión (n = 5) en el grupo de sutura no absorbible (p = 0.03).Este estudio estuvo limitado por su diseño retrospectivo.Las complicaciones relacionadas con la malla se reducen utilizando suturas absorbibles en comparación con las suturas no absorbibles cuando se realiza la rectopexia de malla ventral laparoscópica con malla sintética, sin un aumento en los fracasos de rectopexia. Vea el Resumen del Video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B49.


Assuntos
Laparoscopia/instrumentação , Prolapso Retal/cirurgia , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Suturas/classificação , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Hospitais com Alto Volume de Atendimentos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Centros de Atenção Terciária , Resultado do Tratamento
11.
Acta Cir Bras ; 34(7): e201900703, 2019 Sep 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31531538

RESUMO

PURPOSE: To compare four types of mesh regarding visceral adhesions, inflammatory response and incorporation. METHODS: Sixty Wistar rats were divided into four groups, with different meshes implanted intraperitoneally: polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE group); polypropylene with polydioxanone and oxidized cellulose (PCD); polypropylene (PM) and polypropylene with silicone (PMS). The variables analyzed were: area covered by adhesions, incorporation of the mesh and inflammatory reaction (evaluated histologically and by COX2 immunochemistry). RESULTS: The PMS group had the lowest adhesion area (63.1%) and grade 1 adhesions. The ePTFE and PM groups presented almost the total area of their surface covered by adherences (99.8% and 97.7% respectively) The group ePTFE had the highest percentage of area without incorporation (42%; p <0.001) with no difference between the other meshes. The PMS group had the best incorporation rate. And the histological analysis revealed that the inflammation scores were significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: The PM mesh had higher density of adherences, larger area of adherences, adherences to organs and percentage of incorporation. ePTFE had the higher area of adherences and lower incorporation. The PMS mesh performed best in the inflammation score, had a higher incorporation and lower area of adherences, and it was considered the best type of mesh.


Assuntos
Hérnia Incisional/cirurgia , Inflamação/patologia , Próteses e Implantes , Telas Cirúrgicas/normas , Aderências Teciduais/patologia , Parede Abdominal/patologia , Animais , Celulose Oxidada/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Teste de Materiais , Polipropilenos/efeitos adversos , Politetrafluoretileno/efeitos adversos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Próteses e Implantes/efeitos adversos , Ratos , Ratos Wistar , Silicones/efeitos adversos , Estatísticas não Paramétricas , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Aderências Teciduais/prevenção & controle , Vísceras/fisiologia
12.
JAMA ; 322(11): 1054-1065, 2019 09 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31529008

RESUMO

Importance: Vaginal hysterectomy with suture apical suspension is commonly performed for uterovaginal prolapse. Transvaginal mesh hysteropexy is an alternative option. Objective: To compare the efficacy and adverse events of vaginal hysterectomy with suture apical suspension and transvaginal mesh hysteropexy. Design, Setting, Participants: At 9 clinical sites in the US Pelvic Floor Disorders Network, 183 postmenopausal women with symptomatic uterovaginal prolapse were enrolled in a randomized superiority clinical trial between April 2013 and February 2015. The study was designed for primary analysis when the last randomized participant reached 3 years of follow-up in February 2018. Interventions: Ninety-three women were randomized to undergo vaginal mesh hysteropexy and 90 were randomized to undergo vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary treatment failure composite outcome (re-treatment of prolapse, prolapse beyond the hymen, or prolapse symptoms) was evaluated with survival models. Secondary outcomes included operative outcomes and adverse events, and were evaluated with longitudinal models or contingency tables as appropriate. Results: A total of 183 participants (mean age, 66 years) were randomized, 175 were included in the trial, and 169 (97%) completed the 3-year follow-up. The primary outcome was not significantly different among women who underwent hysteropexy vs hysterectomy through 48 months (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.38-1.02]; P = .06; 36-month adjusted failure incidence, 26% vs 38%). Mean (SD) operative time was lower in the hysteropexy group vs the hysterectomy group (111.5 [39.7] min vs 156.7 [43.9] min; difference, -45.2 [95% CI, -57.7 to -32.7]; P = <.001). Adverse events in the hysteropexy vs hysterectomy groups included mesh exposure (8% vs 0%), ureteral kinking managed intraoperatively (0% vs 7%), granulation tissue after 12 weeks (1% vs 11%), and suture exposure after 12 weeks (3% vs 21%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among women with symptomatic uterovaginal prolapse undergoing vaginal surgery, vaginal mesh hysteropexy compared with vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension did not result in a significantly lower rate of the composite prolapse outcome after 3 years. However, imprecision in study results precludes a definitive conclusion, and further research is needed to assess whether vaginal mesh hysteropexy is more effective than vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01802281.


Assuntos
Histerectomia Vaginal/métodos , Telas Cirúrgicas , Prolapso Uterino/cirurgia , Útero/cirurgia , Idoso , Feminino , Seguimentos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos em Ginecologia/métodos , Humanos , Histerectomia Vaginal/efeitos adversos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Ligamentos/cirurgia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pós-Menopausa , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Vagina/cirurgia
13.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet ; 147(1): 49-53, 2019 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31372976

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and efficacy of a standardized bilateral abdominal sacrocolpopexy using polyvinylidene fluoride mesh 1-year post-operatively. METHODS: In a retrospective observational study of women undergoing bilateral abdominal sacrocolpo/cervicopexy between July 2013 and October 2016 at the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK, patients were assessed 1 year post-operatively using the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Vaginal Symptoms (ICIQ-VS). RESULTS: The study involved 100 women, 93 of whom were followed up 1 year post-operatively. The primary outcome was apical prolapse rate, of which there were none. Eight women had anterior and four had posterior wall prolapses; four women required vaginal repairs. Eleven women complained of urinary stress incontinence (six worsening and five de novo) and five had subsequent tension-free vaginal tape procedures. One woman had urethral pain and one had mesh exposure into the vagina. Pre-operatively, mean ICIQ-VS score was 27.87 (standard deviation [SD] 6.8), and at 1 year post-operatively it was 5.82 (SD 3.8). Impact on quality of life score dropped by 83.4%, from 8.35 (SD 2.1) to 1.39 (SD 1.1). CONCLUSION: The modified technique used in the present study retained the advantages of traditional sacrocolpopexy, but required smaller volumes of mesh. We found it to be safe and effective with excellent patient satisfaction at 1 year, and providing a promising treatment option for patients suffering from apical prolapse.


Assuntos
Procedimentos Cirúrgicos em Ginecologia/métodos , Prolapso de Órgão Pélvico/cirurgia , Idoso , Feminino , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos em Ginecologia/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Qualidade de Vida , Estudos Retrospectivos , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Inquéritos e Questionários
14.
Acta Cir Bras ; 34(6): e201900603, 2019 Aug 19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31432994

RESUMO

PURPOSE: To Compare the extent and intensity of adhesions formed between the intra-abdominal organs and the intraperitoneal implants of polypropylene mesh versus polypropylene/polyglecaprone versus polyester/porcine collagen used for correction of abdominal wall defect in rats. METHODS: After the defect in the abdominal wall, thirty Wistar rats were placed in three groups (ten animals each) for intraperitoneal mesh implant: polypropylene group, polypropylene/polyglecaprone group, and polyester/porcine collagen group. The macroscopic evaluation of the extent and intensity of adhesions was performed 21 days after the implant. RESULTS: The polypropylene group had a higher statistically significant impairment due to visceral adhesions (p value = 0.002) and a higher degree of intense adherence in relation to polypropylene/polyglecaprone and polyester/porcine collagen groups (p value<0.001). The polyester/porcine collagen group showed more intense adhesions than the polypropylene/polyglecaprone group (p value=0.035). CONCLUSIONS: The intraperitoneal implantation of polypropylene meshes to correct defects of the abdominal wall caused the appearance of extensive and firm adhesions to intra-abdominal structures. The use of polypropylene/polyglecaprone or polyester/porcine collagen tissue-separating meshes reduces the number and degree of adhesions formed.


Assuntos
Colágeno/administração & dosagem , Dioxanos/administração & dosagem , Doenças Peritoneais/etiologia , Poliésteres/administração & dosagem , Polipropilenos/administração & dosagem , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Aderências Teciduais/etiologia , Parede Abdominal/patologia , Animais , Colágeno/efeitos adversos , Dioxanos/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Teste de Materiais , Poliésteres/efeitos adversos , Polipropilenos/efeitos adversos , Ratos , Ratos Wistar
15.
Urology ; 134: 2-23, 2019 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31415778

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: This study reports the re-operation and symptom resolution rates of different techniques used in surgical excision of genitourinary mesh erosions. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic review was completed after searching electronic databases for studies involving outcomes of mesh erosion in humans that were managed surgically using a transvaginal, cystoscopic, or abdominal approach. Surgical outcomes were reported in percentages, ranges, and simple pooling to generate trends in management techniques. RESULTS: There were 177 cases that met our inclusion criteria. Forty-one patients underwent cystoscopic removal of eroded urethral mesh while 40 cases underwent transvaginal removal of urethral mesh. CONCLUSIONS: For mesh eroded into the urethra, a transvaginal vs. cystoscopic approach showed a trend toward resolution of symptoms and fewer interventions. For mesh eroded into the bladder, abdominal and cystoscopic approaches had similar symptom resolution, but abdominal approach required fewer interventions.


Assuntos
Falha de Prótese , Reoperação , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urogenitais , Pesquisa Comparativa da Efetividade , Humanos , Falha de Prótese/efeitos adversos , Falha de Prótese/etiologia , Reoperação/efeitos adversos , Reoperação/métodos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urogenitais/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urogenitais/instrumentação , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urogenitais/métodos
16.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet ; 147(2): 147-155, 2019 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31353463

RESUMO

The use of synthetic mesh implantation for the surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI) has grown in popularity since mesh was marketed for widespread use in the early 1990s. As mesh usage has expanded, patterns of previously unexpected complications have become apparent. In the United States and other countries, the increase in reported outcomes (both positive and negative) has led to the initiation of medico-legal actions by patients reporting negative effects of the implanted mesh. As a result, several national and professional societies have convened expert panels to publish summaries of reported outcomes and provide clinical recommendations regarding mesh use. Despite their recommendations and further dissemination of the potential complications reported after urogynecologic mesh use, the popularity of mesh use for POP and SUI has continued to expand, with apparent geographic and national patterns. As the largest global association focusing on women's health, FIGO, via its Urogynecology and Pelvic Floor Committee, has reviewed published national recommendations regarding the use of mesh, and has summarized them for the FIGO membership to help disseminate important recommendations to surgeons who may not be aware of the existence and content of these recommendations.


Assuntos
Prolapso de Órgão Pélvico/cirurgia , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Incontinência Urinária por Estresse/cirurgia , Feminino , Humanos , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto
17.
Am Surg ; 85(6): 620-624, 2019 Jun 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31267903

RESUMO

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of lightweight and heavyweight mesh on postoperative recovery in laparoscopic total extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair. PubMed, Embase, Science Citation Index, and the Cochrane Library were used to search for published clinical randomized controlled trials, which compared lightweight meshes with heavyweight meshes in TEP inguinal hernia repair. The outcomes were calculated as risk ratios with 95 per cent confidence intervals using RevMan 5.2. Eight randomized controlled trials were included. Compared with a heavyweight mesh, the lightweight mesh led to a higher incidence of recurrence (risk ratio = 2.52, 95% confidence interval 1.10-5.81; P = 0.03). There was no significant difference in chronic moderate to severe pain, foreign body sensation, and seroma. The use of lightweight mesh is not recommended for TEP inguinal hernia repair.


Assuntos
Hérnia Inguinal/cirurgia , Herniorrafia/métodos , Laparoscopia/métodos , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Intervalos de Confiança , Feminino , Herniorrafia/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Laparoscopia/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Minimamente Invasivos/métodos , Dor Pós-Operatória/epidemiologia , Dor Pós-Operatória/fisiopatologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/fisiopatologia , Prognóstico , Desenho de Prótese , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Seroma/epidemiologia , Seroma/fisiopatologia , Resultado do Tratamento
19.
Isr Med Assoc J ; 21(6): 399-403, 2019 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31280509

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Hysterectomy is common in the management of symptomatic uterine prolapse. Vaginal wall repair is often necessary, for which vaginal mesh remains a popular option. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the risk of mesh erosion following mesh-augmented vaginal prolapse repair, with or without concomitant vaginal hysterectomy. METHODS: This retrospective cohort comprised 70 women who underwent vaginal mesh-augmented pelvic organ prolapse repair from 2007 to 2010. Of the participants, 36 (51.4%) had a vaginal hysterectomy concomitant to the anterior and/or posterior vaginal mesh repair (hysterectomy group) and 34 (48.6%) underwent mesh repair without vaginal hysterectomy (no hysterectomy group). RESULTS: There were no inter-group differences in age, parity, menopausal state, hormonal use, or presenting symptoms. Previous prolapse repair surgery was much more common in the no hysterectomy group (29.4% vs. 5.5%, P = 0.01). Eleven patients (32.3%) in the no hysterectomy group had previously undergone hysterectomy. Anterior mesh repair was performed in 77.7% and 67.6% of hysterectomy and no hysterectomy patients, respectively. Posterior mesh repair was performed in 27.7% and 44.1%, respectively. One patient in the hysterectomy group underwent immediate removal of mesh due to infection. Surgically treated mesh erosion (limited local excision) occurred in three patients (8.3%) in the hysterectomy group (3, 16, and 18 months following surgery) and in two patients (5.8%) in the no hysterectomy group at 6 months following surgery (P = 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Vaginal mesh-augmentation concomitant with vaginal hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse repair does not carry an increased risk of erosion.


Assuntos
Falha de Equipamento/estatística & dados numéricos , Histerectomia Vaginal , Prolapso de Órgão Pélvico/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Telas Cirúrgicas/efeitos adversos , Estudos de Coortes , Feminino , Humanos , Israel/epidemiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Risco
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA