nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.11.2010 | Review Article

Systematic review of the efficacy and safety of using mesh in surgery for uterine or vaginal vault prolapse

verfasst von: Xueli Jia, Cathryn Glazener, Graham Mowatt, David Jenkinson, Cynthia Fraser, Christine Bain, Jennifer Burr

Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal | Ausgabe 11/2010

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The aim of this study is to estimate efficacy and safety of mesh in surgery for uterine or vault prolapse.

Methods

Seventeen electronic databases were searched for relevant studies that were published from 1980 onwards.

Results

Fifty-four studies involving 7,054 women were included. For sacrocolpopexy (average follow-up 23 months), the risk of clinical recurrence ranged from 0% to 6%, persistent symptoms ranged from 3% to 31% and mesh erosion from 0% to 12%. For infracoccygeal sacropexy (average follow-up 13 months), the risk of clinical recurrence ranged from 0% to 25%, persistent symptoms from 2% to 21% and mesh erosion 0% to 21%. Limited evidence was available for sacrocolpoperineopexy and uterine suspension sling to draw reliable estimates.

Conclusions

Sacrocolpopexy was associated with a low risk of recurrence but with a relatively high risk of mesh erosion. Ranges of estimates for outcomes for other mesh techniques were wide.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Hagen S, Stark D, Maher C, Adams EJ (2006) Conservative management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Issue 4. Art. No.: CD003882. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003882.pub3

Adams EJ, Thomson A, Maher C, Hagen S (2004) Mechanical devices for pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Issue 2. Art. No.: CD004010. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004010.pub2

Maher C, Baessler K, Glazener CM, Adams EJ, Hagen S (2007). Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Issue 3. Art. No.: CD004014. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004014.pub3

Systematic review of the efficacy and safety of using mesh or grafts in surgery for uterine or vaginal vault prolapse (2008). National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, London. http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/index.jsp?action=download&o=41728. Accessed September 2009

Systematic reviews: CRD’s guidance for undertaking systematic reviews in health care (2009). Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York. http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/SysRev/!SSL!/WebHelp/SysRev3.htm. Accessed September 2009

Downs SH, Black N (1998) The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health 52:377–384CrossRefPubMed

Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, de Bie RA, Kessels AG, Boers M, Bouter LM et al (1998) The Delphi list: a criteria list for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi consensus. J Clin Epidemiol 51:1235–1241CrossRefPubMed

Benson JT, Lucente V, McClellan E (1996) 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 175:1418–1421CrossRefPubMed

Culligan PJ, Blackwell L, Goldsmith LJ, Graham CA, Rogers A, Heit MH (2005) A randomized controlled trial comparing fascia lata and synthetic mesh for sacral colpopexy. Obstet Gynecol 106:29–37PubMed

10.

Lo T-S (1998) Abdominal colposacropexy and sacrospinous ligament suspension for severe uterovaginal prolapse: a comparison. J Gynecol Surg 14:59–64CrossRef

11.

Maher CF, Qatawneh AM, Dwyer PL, Carey MP, Cornish A, Schluter PJ (2004) Abdominal sacral colpopexy or vaginal sacrospinous colpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse: a prospective randomized study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 190:20–26CrossRefPubMed

12.

Roovers JP, van der Vaart C, van der Bom JG, van Leeuwen JH, Scholten PC, Heintz PM (2004) A randomised controlled trial comparing abdominal and vaginal prolapse surgery: effect on urogenital function. BJOG 111:50–56CrossRefPubMed

13.

Braun H, Fernandez M, Delloro A, Gonzalez F, Cuevas R, Rojas I (2007) Prospective randomised study to compare colposacropexy and Mayo McCall technique in the correction of severe genital central prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 18:S12

14.

Meschia M, Barbacini P, Longatti D, Gattei U, Pifarotti P (2005) Randomized comparison between infracoccygeal sacropexy (posterior IVS) and sacrospinous ligament fixation in the management of vault prolpase. Int Urogynecol J 16:S54

15.

Tayrac R, Bader G, Deffieux X, Fazel A, Mathe ML, Fernandez H (2006) A prospective randomized study comparing posterior IVS and sacrospinous suspension for the surgical treatment of uterine or vaginal vault prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 17:S234–S235CrossRef

16.

Altman D, Anzen B, Brismar S, Lopez A, Zetterstrom J (2006) Long-term outcome of abdominal sacrocolpopexy using xenograft compared with synthetic mesh. Urology 67:719–724CrossRefPubMed

17.

Bai SW, Kwon HS, Chung DJ (2006) Abdominal high uterosacral colpopexy and abdominal sacral colpopexy with mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. Int J Gynecol Obstet 92:147–148CrossRef

18.

Begley JS, Kupferman SP, Kuznetsov DD, Kobashi KC, Govier FE, McGonigle KF et al (2005) Incidence and management of abdominal sacrocolpopexy mesh erosions. Am J Obstet Gynecol 192:1956–1962CrossRefPubMed

19.

Costantini E, Mearini L, Bini V, Zucchi A, Mearini E, Porena M (2005) Uterus preservation in surgical correction of urogenital prolapse. Eur Urol 48:642–649CrossRefPubMed

20.

Demirci F (2007) Perioperative complications in abdominal sacrocolpopexy and vaginal sacrospinous ligament fixation procedures. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18:257–261CrossRefPubMed

21.

Govier FE, Kobashi KC, Kozlowski PM, Kuznetsov DD, Begley SJ, McGonigle KF et al (2005) High complication rate identified in sacrocolpopexy patients attributed to silicone mesh. Urology 65:1099–1103CrossRefPubMed

22.

Gregory WT, Otto LN, Bergstrom JO, Clark AL (2005) Surgical outcome of abdominal sacrocolpopexy with synthetic mesh versus abdominal sacrocolpopexy with cadaveric fascia lata. Int Urogynecol J 16:369–374CrossRef

23.

Griffis K, Evers MD, Terry CL, Hale DS (2006) Mesh erosion and abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comparison of prior, total, and supracervical hysterectomy. J Pelvic Med Surg 12:25–30CrossRef

24.

Hardiman PJ, Drutz HP (1996) Sacrospinous vault suspension and abdominal colposacropexy: success rates and complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:612–616CrossRefPubMed

25.

Hsiao KC (2007) Comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. J Endourol 21:926–930CrossRefPubMed

26.

Marcickiewicz J, Kjollesdal M, Engh ME, Eklind S, Axen C, Brannstrom M et al (2007) Vaginal sacrospinous colpopexy and laparoscopic sacral colpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 86:733–738CrossRefPubMed

27.

Neuman M, Lavy Y (2007) Conservation of the prolapsed uterus is a valid option: medium term results of a prospective comparative study with the posterior intravaginal slingoplasty operation. Int Urogynecol J 18:889–893CrossRef

28.

Ng CC, Han WH (2004) Comparison of effectiveness of vaginal and abdominal routes in treating severe uterovaginal or vault prolapse. Singapore Med J 45:475–481PubMed

29.

Paraiso MF, Walters MD, Rackley RR, Melek S, Hugney C (2005) Laparoscopic and abdominal sacral colpopexies: a comparative cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 192:1752–1758CrossRefPubMed

30.

Sze EH, Kohli N, Miklos JR, Roat T, Karram MM (1999) A retrospective comparison of abdominal sacrocolpopexy with Burch colposuspension versus sacrospinous fixation with transvaginal needle suspension for the management of vaginal vault prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 10:390–393CrossRef

31.

Visco AG, Weidner AC, Barber MD, Myers ER, Cundiff GW, Bump RC et al (2001) Vaginal mesh erosion after abdominal sacral colpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 184:297–302CrossRefPubMed

32.

Young SB, Kohorn EI, Braz-Martin S, Baker SP (2004) A survey of the complications of vaginal prolapse surgery performed by members of the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons. Int Urogynecol J 15:165–170CrossRef

33.

Banu LF (1997) Synthetic sling for genital prolapse in young women. Int J Gynecol Obstet 57:57–64CrossRef

34.

Barranger E, Fritel X, Pigne A (2003) Abdominal sacrohysteropexy in young women with uterovaginal prolapse: long-term follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol 18:1245–1250CrossRef

35.

Bensinger G, Lind L, Lesser M, Guess M, Winkler HA (2005) Abdominal sacral suspensions: analysis of complications using permanent mesh. Am J Obstet Gynecol 193:2094–2098CrossRefPubMed

36.

Bradley CS (2007) Bowel symptoms in women 1 year after sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 197:642 e1–642 e8

37.

Brizzolara S, Pillai-Allen A (2003) Risk of mesh erosion with sacral colpopexy and concurrent hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol 102:306–310CrossRefPubMed

38.

Culligan PJ, Murphy M, Blackwell L, Hammons G, Graham C, Heit MH (2002) Long-term success of abdominal sacral colpopexy using synthetic mesh. Am J Obstet Gynecol 187:1473–1480CrossRefPubMed

39.

de Vries MJ, van Dessel TH, Drogendijk AC, de Haas I, Huikeshoven FJ (1995) Short-term results and long-term patients’ appraisal of abdominal colposacropexy for treatment of genital and vaginal vault prolapse. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 59:35–38CrossRefPubMed

40.

Elneil S, Cutner AS, Remy M, Leather AT, Toozs-Hobson P, Wise B (2005) Abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vault prolapse without burial of mesh: a case series. BJOG 112:486–489CrossRefPubMed

41.

Farnsworth BN (2002) Posterior intravaginal slingplasty (infracoccygeal sacropexy) for severe posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse—a preliminary report on efficacy and safety. Int Urogynecol J 13:4–8CrossRef

42.

Fedorkow DM, Kalbfleisch RE (1993) Total abdominal hysterectomy at abdominal sacrovaginopexy—a comparative-study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 169:641–643PubMed

43.

Foote AJ (2007) Infracoccygeal sacropexy. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 47:250–251CrossRefPubMed

44.

Ghanbari Z, Baratali BH, Mireshghi MS (2006) Posterior intravaginal slingplasty (infracoccygeal sacropexy) in the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 94:147–148CrossRefPubMed

45.

Hefni M (2007) Morbidity associated with posterior intravaginal slingplasty for uterovaginal and vault prolapse. Arch Gynecol Obstet 276:499–504CrossRefPubMed

46.

Higgs P, Goh J, Krause H, Sloane K, Carey M (2005) Abdominal sacral colpopexy: an independent prospective long-term follow-up study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 45:430–434CrossRefPubMed

47.

Higgs PJ, Chua HL, Smith AR (2005) Long term review of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. BJOG 112:1134–1138CrossRefPubMed

48.

Jordaan DJ, Prollius A, Cronje HS, Nel M (2006) Posterior intravaginal slingplasty for vaginal prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 17:326–329CrossRef

49.

Joshi VM (1993) A new technique of uterine suspension to pectineal ligaments in the management of uterovaginal prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 81:790–793PubMed

50.

Leron E, Stanton SL (2001) Sacrohysteropexy with synthetic mesh for the management of uterovaginal prolapse. BJOG 108:629–633CrossRefPubMed

51.

Lindeque BG, Nel WS (2002) Sacrocolpopexy—a report on 262 consecutive operations. S Afr Med J 92:982–985PubMed

52.

Oliver R, Dasgupta C, Coker A (2006) Posterior intravaginal slingplasty for vault and uterovaginal prolapse: an initial experience. Gynecol Surg 3:88–92CrossRef

53.

Papa Petros PE (2001) Vault prolapse II: restoration of dynamic vaginal supports by infracoccygeal sacropexy, an axial day-case vaginal procedure. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 12:296–303CrossRef

54.

Petros PE, Richardson PA (2005) Tissue Fixation System posterior sling for repair of uterine/vault prolapse—a preliminary report. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 45:376–379CrossRefPubMed

55.

Sentilhes L, Sergent F, Resch B, Verspyck E, Descamps P, Marpeau L (2007) Midterm follow-up of high-grade genital prolapse repair by the trans-obturator and infracoccygeal hammock procedure after hysterectomy. Eur Urol 51:1065–1072CrossRefPubMed

56.

Sivaslioglu AA, Gelisen O, Dolen I, Dede H, Dilbaz S, Haberal A (2005) Posterior sling (infracoccygeal sacropexy): an alternative procedure for vaginal vault prolapse. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 45:159–160CrossRefPubMed

57.

Snyder TE, Krantz KE (1991) Abdominal-retroperitoneal sacral colpopexy for the correction of vaginal prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 77:944–949PubMed

58.

Su KC, Mutone MF, Terry CL, Hale DS (2007) Abdominovaginal sacral colpoperineopexy: patient perceptions, anatomical outcomes, and graft erosions. Int Urogynecol J 18:503–511CrossRef

59.

Timmons MC, Addison WA, Addison SB, Cavenar MG (1992) Abdominal sacral colpopexy in 163 women with posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse and enterocele. Evolution of operative techniques. J Reprod Med 37:323–327PubMed

60.

Vardy MD, Brodman M, Olivera CK, Zhou HS, Flisser AJ, Bercik RS (2007) Anterior intravaginal slingplasty tunneller device for stress incontinence and posterior intravaginal slingplasty for apical vault prolapse: a 2-year prospective multicenter study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 197:104–108CrossRefPubMed

61.

Wu JM, Wells EC, Hundley AF, Connolly A, Williams KS, Visco AG (2006) Mesh erosion in abdominal sacral colpopexy with and without concomitant hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 194:1418–1422CrossRefPubMed

62.

Brown M (2004). Long-term effectiveness of abdominal sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00099372. ClinicalTrials.gov. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00099372?term=nct00099372&rank=1. Accessed September 2009

63.

Chen CC (2007). Laparoscopic versus robotic assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for vaginal prolapse. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00551993. ClinicalTrials.gov. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00551993?term=nct00551993&rank=1. Accessed September 2009.

64.

Culligan P (2005). Randomized controlled trial comparing acellular collagen biomesh (Pelvisoft) to polypropylene mesh (Pelvitex) for sacral colpopexy. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00564083. ClinicalTrials.gov. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00564083?term=nct00564083&rank=1. Accessed September 2009

65.

Freeman R (2006). LAS study - a randomised controlled trial of abdominal versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse. NRR ID N0185181850. National Research Register Archive. https://portal.nihr.ac.uk/Profiles/NRR.aspx?Publication_ID=N0185181850. Accessed September 2009

66.

Gannon NA (2005). Treatment of stress and mixed urinary incontinence and vaginal vault prolapse. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00223106. ClinicalTrials.gov. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00223106?term=nct00223106&rank=1. Accessed September 2009

67.

Halaska M (2007). Randomized multicentric study to treat prolapse after hysterectomy with Amreich procedure or total Prolift procedure. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00572702. ClinicalTrials.gov. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00572702?term=nct00572702&rank=1. Accessed September 2009

68.

Zylstra S (2006). Observational data collection of surgical outcomes in the treatment of vaginal prolapse with AMS products. ClincialTrials.gov Identifier NCT00388947. ClinicalTrials.gov. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00388947?term=nct00388947&rank=1. Accessed September 2009

69.

Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL (1997) Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 89:501–506CrossRefPubMed

70.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (2009). Sacrocolpopexy using mesh for vaginal vault. Interventional Procedure Guidance IPG283. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, London. http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/IPG283Guidance.pdf. Accessed September 2009

71.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (2009). Infracoccygeal sacropexy using mesh for uterine prolapse repair. Interventional Procedure Guidance IPG280. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, London. http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/IPG280Guidance.pdf. Accessed September 2009

72.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (2009). Insertion of mesh uterine suspension sling (including sacrohysteropexy) for uterine prolapse repair. Interventional Procedure Guidance IPG282. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, London. http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/IPG282guidance.pdf. Accessed September 2009

73.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (2009). Infracoccygeal sacropexy using mesh for vaginal vault prolapse repair. Interventional Procedure Guidance IPG281. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, London. http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/IPG281Guidance.pdf. Accessed September 2009

74.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (2009). Sacrocolpopexy with hysterectomy using mesh for uterine prolapse repair. Interventional Procedure Guidance IPG284. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, London. http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/IPG%20284%20Guidance%20LR%20FINAL.PDF.pdf. Accessed September 2009

Titel: Systematic review of the efficacy and safety of using mesh in surgery for uterine or vaginal vault prolapse
verfasst von: Xueli Jia
Cathryn Glazener
Graham Mowatt
David Jenkinson
Cynthia Fraser
Christine Bain
Jennifer Burr
Publikationsdatum: 01.11.2010
Verlag: Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal / Ausgabe 11/2010
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-010-1156-7

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

17.04.2024 | Postoperative nausea and vomiting | Nachrichten

Update Gynäkologie

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

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Systematic review of the efficacy and safety of using mesh in surgery for uterine or vaginal vault prolapse

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

Hochrisiko-Eingriffe für postoperative Übelkeit

Adjuvante Brustkrebstherapie: Doppelt hält besser

Manche Gestagene können das Risiko für Meningeome erhöhen

Stillende Frauen haben geringeres kardiovaskuläres Risiko

Update Gynäkologie

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 11/2010

Extensive uterine prolapse during active labor: a case report

Childbirth method has an effect on non-fistulous urinary incontinence amongst sub-Saharan African women: fact or fallacy?

LOX family enzymes expression in vaginal tissue of premenopausal women with severe pelvic organ prolapse

Management of recurrent or persistent stress urinary incontinence after TVT-O by mesh readjustment

Erratum to: Tape functionality: position, change in shape, and outcome after TVT procedure—mid-term results

Complications of the tension-free vaginal tape procedure for stress urinary incontinence

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

Hochrisiko-Eingriffe für postoperative Übelkeit

Adjuvante Brustkrebstherapie: Doppelt hält besser

Manche Gestagene können das Risiko für Meningeome erhöhen

Stillende Frauen haben geringeres kardiovaskuläres Risiko

Update Gynäkologie