Skip to main content
Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal 4/2019

01.04.2019 | Original Article

Association between method of pelvic organ prolapse repair involving the vaginal apex and re-operation: a population-based, retrospective cohort study

verfasst von: You (Maria) Wu, Jennifer Reid, Queena Chou, Barry MacMillan, Yvonne Leong, Blayne Welk

Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal | Ausgabe 4/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Vaginal apical suspension is essential for the surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). We aim to evaluate whether the method of apical repair is associated with different re-operation rates for POP recurrence or surgical complications.

Methods

Population-based, retrospective cohort study of all Ontario women receiving primary apical POP repairs from 2003 to 2015. Primary exposure was the method of apical POP repair. Primary outcome was re-operation for recurrent POP, and secondary outcomes were surgical procedures for genito-intestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) complications, fistula repair, and mesh revision or removal.

Results

Forty-three thousand four hundred fifty-eight women were included. Overall, the number of mesh-based apical repairs decreased over time, while the number of native-tissue repairs slightly increased (p < 0.001). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards (Cox PH) analysis demonstrated a significant increase in repeat POP operations for transvaginal mesh apical repairs (adjusted HR 1.28 [95% CI: 1.10–1.48]), but not in abdominal mesh repairs (adjusted HR 0.96 [95% CI: 0.81–1.13]) compared with vaginal native tissue apical repairs. Overall risk of repeat surgery for fistulas or GI and GU complications remained low (< 0.5%). Risk of mesh removal or revision was 11.5–11.9%, with no difference between abdominal versus vaginal mesh on multivariable analysis (adjusted HR 0.99 [95% CI: 0.78–1.26]).

Conclusions

Re-operation for recurrent POP is highest in transvaginal mesh apical repairs; however, this risk did not differ between abdominal mesh and vaginal native tissue apical repairs. GI and GU re-operations are rare. There is no difference in mesh removal or revision rates between abdominal and vaginal mesh repairs.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Shull BL. Pelvic organ prolapse: anterior, superior, and posterior vaginal segment defects. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;181(1):6–11.CrossRefPubMed Shull BL. Pelvic organ prolapse: anterior, superior, and posterior vaginal segment defects. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;181(1):6–11.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Alas AN, Anger JT. Role of apical support defect: correction in women undergoing vaginal prolapse surgery. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2014;26(5):386–92.CrossRefPubMed Alas AN, Anger JT. Role of apical support defect: correction in women undergoing vaginal prolapse surgery. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2014;26(5):386–92.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Raman SV, Raker CA, Sung VW. Concomitant apical prolapse repair and incontinence procedures: trends from 2001-2009 in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211(3):222.e1–5.CrossRef Raman SV, Raker CA, Sung VW. Concomitant apical prolapse repair and incontinence procedures: trends from 2001-2009 in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211(3):222.e1–5.CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Dubuisson J, et al. Laparoscopic repair of vaginal vault prolapse by lateral suspension with mesh. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013;287(2):307–12.CrossRefPubMed Dubuisson J, et al. Laparoscopic repair of vaginal vault prolapse by lateral suspension with mesh. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013;287(2):307–12.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Younger A, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery in academic female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery urology practice in the setting of the Food and Drug Administration public health notifications. Urology. 2016;91:46–50.CrossRefPubMed Younger A, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery in academic female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery urology practice in the setting of the Food and Drug Administration public health notifications. Urology. 2016;91:46–50.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Administration, U.F.a.D. Urogynecologic surgical mesh: update on the safety and effectiveness of transvaginal placement for pelvic organ prolapse. Center for Devices and Radiological Health; 2011. p. 15. Administration, U.F.a.D. Urogynecologic surgical mesh: update on the safety and effectiveness of transvaginal placement for pelvic organ prolapse. Center for Devices and Radiological Health; 2011. p. 15.
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Feiner B, Maher C. Vaginal mesh contraction: definition, clinical presentation, and management. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115(2 Pt 1):325–30.CrossRefPubMed Feiner B, Maher C. Vaginal mesh contraction: definition, clinical presentation, and management. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115(2 Pt 1):325–30.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Iglesia CB, et al. Vaginal mesh for prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(2 Pt 1):293–303.CrossRefPubMed Iglesia CB, et al. Vaginal mesh for prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(2 Pt 1):293–303.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Nygaard IE, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(4):805–23.CrossRefPubMed Nygaard IE, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(4):805–23.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Jelovsek JE, et al. Effect of uterosacral ligament suspension vs sacrospinous ligament fixation with or without perioperative behavioral therapy for pelvic organ vaginal prolapse on surgical outcomes and prolapse symptoms at 5 years in the OPTIMAL randomized clinical trial. Jama. 2018;319(15):1554–65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jelovsek JE, et al. Effect of uterosacral ligament suspension vs sacrospinous ligament fixation with or without perioperative behavioral therapy for pelvic organ vaginal prolapse on surgical outcomes and prolapse symptoms at 5 years in the OPTIMAL randomized clinical trial. Jama. 2018;319(15):1554–65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Siddiqui NY, et al. Mesh sacrocolpopexy compared with native tissue vaginal repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(1):44–55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Siddiqui NY, et al. Mesh sacrocolpopexy compared with native tissue vaginal repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(1):44–55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Morling JR, et al. Adverse events after first, single, mesh and non-mesh surgical procedures for stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in Scotland, 1997-2016: a population-based cohort study. Lancet. 2017;389(10069):629–40.CrossRefPubMed Morling JR, et al. Adverse events after first, single, mesh and non-mesh surgical procedures for stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in Scotland, 1997-2016: a population-based cohort study. Lancet. 2017;389(10069):629–40.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Benchimol EI, et al. The REporting of studies conducted using observational routinely-collected health data (RECORD) statement. PLoS Med. 2015;12(10):e1001885.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Benchimol EI, et al. The REporting of studies conducted using observational routinely-collected health data (RECORD) statement. PLoS Med. 2015;12(10):e1001885.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Williams J, Young W. Appendix I: a summary of studies on the quality of health care administrative databases in Canada. In: Williams J, Goel V, Anderson GM et al., editors. Patterns of Health Care in Ontario: the ICES Practice Atlas, 2nd edition. Canadian Medical Association; 2000. p. 339–347. Williams J, Young W. Appendix I: a summary of studies on the quality of health care administrative databases in Canada. In: Williams J, Goel V, Anderson GM et al., editors. Patterns of Health Care in Ontario: the ICES Practice Atlas, 2nd edition. Canadian Medical Association; 2000. p. 339–347.
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Raina P, et al. Agreement between self-reported and routinely collected health-care utilization data among seniors. Health Serv Res. 2002;37(3):751–74.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Raina P, et al. Agreement between self-reported and routinely collected health-care utilization data among seniors. Health Serv Res. 2002;37(3):751–74.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Iron K, Manuel D. Quality assessment of administrative data (QuAAD): an opportunity for enhancing Ontario’s health data. ICES investigative report. Toronto: Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences; 2007. Iron K, Manuel D. Quality assessment of administrative data (QuAAD): an opportunity for enhancing Ontario’s health data. ICES investigative report. Toronto: Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences; 2007.
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Gibson D, Richards H, Chapman A. The National Ambulatory Care Reporting System: factors that affect the quality of its emergency data. Int J Inf Qual. 2008;2(2):97–114. Gibson D, Richards H, Chapman A. The National Ambulatory Care Reporting System: factors that affect the quality of its emergency data. Int J Inf Qual. 2008;2(2):97–114.
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Jha P, et al. Characteristics and mortality outcomes of thrombolysis trial participants and nonparticipants: a population-based comparison. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;27(6):1335–42.CrossRefPubMed Jha P, et al. Characteristics and mortality outcomes of thrombolysis trial participants and nonparticipants: a population-based comparison. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;27(6):1335–42.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Weiner JP. The Johns Hopkins ACG® Case-Mix System Version 10.0 Release Notes., H.S.R.D.C. The Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Editor. 2011: The Johns Hopkins University. Weiner JP. The Johns Hopkins ACG® Case-Mix System Version 10.0 Release Notes., H.S.R.D.C. The Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Editor. 2011: The Johns Hopkins University.
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Austin PC, et al. Using the Johns Hopkins aggregated diagnosis groups (ADGs) to predict mortality in a general adult population cohort in Ontario, Canada. Med Care. 2011;49(10):932–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Austin PC, et al. Using the Johns Hopkins aggregated diagnosis groups (ADGs) to predict mortality in a general adult population cohort in Ontario, Canada. Med Care. 2011;49(10):932–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Fine JP, Gray RJ. A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J Am Stat Assoc. 1999;94(446):496–509.CrossRef Fine JP, Gray RJ. A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J Am Stat Assoc. 1999;94(446):496–509.CrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat LO T-S, WANG AC. Abdominal Colposacropexy and sacrospinous ligament suspension for severe Uterovaginal prolapse: a comparison. J Gynecol Surg. 1998;14(2):59–64.CrossRef LO T-S, WANG AC. Abdominal Colposacropexy and sacrospinous ligament suspension for severe Uterovaginal prolapse: a comparison. J Gynecol Surg. 1998;14(2):59–64.CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Chen Y, Hua K. Medium-term outcomes of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy or sacrohysteropexy versus vaginal sacrospinous ligament fixation for middle compartment prolapse. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2017;137(2):164–9.CrossRefPubMed Chen Y, Hua K. Medium-term outcomes of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy or sacrohysteropexy versus vaginal sacrospinous ligament fixation for middle compartment prolapse. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2017;137(2):164–9.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Larouche M, Geoffrion R, Walter J-E. No. 351-transvaginal mesh procedures for pelvic organ prolapse. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2017;39(11):1085–97.CrossRefPubMed Larouche M, Geoffrion R, Walter J-E. No. 351-transvaginal mesh procedures for pelvic organ prolapse. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2017;39(11):1085–97.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Stewart JR, Hamner JJ, Heit MH. Thirty years of cystocele/rectocele repair in the United States. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2016;22(4):243–7.CrossRefPubMed Stewart JR, Hamner JJ, Heit MH. Thirty years of cystocele/rectocele repair in the United States. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2016;22(4):243–7.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Kelly EC, Winick-Ng J, Welk B. Surgeon experience and complications of transvaginal prolapse mesh. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(1):65–72.CrossRefPubMed Kelly EC, Winick-Ng J, Welk B. Surgeon experience and complications of transvaginal prolapse mesh. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(1):65–72.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Diwadkar GB, et al. Complication and reoperation rates after apical vaginal prolapse surgical repair: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113(2 Pt 1):367–73.CrossRefPubMed Diwadkar GB, et al. Complication and reoperation rates after apical vaginal prolapse surgical repair: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113(2 Pt 1):367–73.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Committee Opinion No. 694: Management of Mesh and Graft Complications in gynecologic surgery. Obstet Gynecol 2017;129(4):e102-e108. Committee Opinion No. 694: Management of Mesh and Graft Complications in gynecologic surgery. Obstet Gynecol 2017;129(4):e102-e108.
Metadaten
Titel
Association between method of pelvic organ prolapse repair involving the vaginal apex and re-operation: a population-based, retrospective cohort study
verfasst von
You (Maria) Wu
Jennifer Reid
Queena Chou
Barry MacMillan
Yvonne Leong
Blayne Welk
Publikationsdatum
01.04.2019
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
International Urogynecology Journal / Ausgabe 4/2019
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-018-3792-2

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2019

International Urogynecology Journal 4/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.