Advertisement

Management of complications arising from the use of mesh for stress urinary incontinence—International Urogynecology Association Research and Development Committee opinion

  • Jonathan DuckettEmail author
  • Barbara Bodner-Adler
  • Suneetha Rachaneni
  • Pallavi Latthe
Review Article

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Management of pain or mesh exposure complications after stress incontinence surgery has become a new issue over the last 20 years with the introduction of mesh techniques to treat stress incontinence. There is much debate regarding the incidence of complications and how best to treat them.

Methods

A working subcommittee from the International Urogynecology Association (IUGA) Research and Development (R&D) Committee was formed. An initial document was drafted based on a literature review. The review focused on complications of vaginal mesh inserted for stress incontinence. After evaluation by the entire IUGA R&D Committee revisions were made. The final document represents the IUGA R&D Committee Opinion.

Results

The R&D Committee Opinion reviews the literature on the management of complications arising from the use of mesh for stress urinary incontinence. The review concentrated on the assessment and treatment of pain and exposure.

Conclusions

Complications after surgery for stress incontinence using mesh may not be common occurrences for individual surgeons. Complications may be difficult to manage and outcomes are variable. Specialist centres and a multidisciplinary approach may optimise treatment and reporting of outcomes.

Keywords

Mesh Mideurethral sling Complication Stress incontinence 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Morling JR, McAllister DA, Agur W, Fischbacher CM, Glazener CM, Guerrero K, 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;389:629–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gurol-Urganci I, Geary RS, Mamza JB, et al. Long-term rate of mesh sling removal following midurethral mesh sling insertion among women with stress urinary incontinence. JAMA. 2018;320:1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Keltie K, Elneil S, Monga A, Patrick H, Powell J, Campbell B, et al. Complications following vaginal mesh procedures for stress urinary incontinence: an 8 year study of 92,246 women. Sci Rep. 2017;20(7):2015.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    England NHS. Mesh oversight group report. Leeds: NHS England. 2017. https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/mesh-oversight-group-report.
  5. 5.
    Duckett J, Morley R, Monga A, Hillard T, Robinson D. Mesh removal after vaginal surgery: what happens in the UK? Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28(7):989–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bazi T, Kerkhof MH, Takahashi SI, Abdel-Fattah M. IUGA Research and Development Committee. Management of post-midurethral sling voiding dysfunction. International Urogynecological Association research and development committee opinion. Int Urogynecol J. 2018;29(1):23–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Barski D, Deng DY. Management of Mesh Complications after SUI and POP repair: review and analysis of the current literature. Biomed Res Int. 2015:831285.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/831285.
  8. 8.
    MacDonald S, Terlecki R, Costantini E, Badlani G. Complications of transvaginal mesh for pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence: tips for prevention, recognition, and management. Eur Urol Focus. 2016;2(3):260–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brubaker L. Editorial: partner dyspareunia (hispareunia). Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2006;17(4):311.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee SY, Kim JY, Park SK, Kwon YW, Nguyen HB, Chang IH, et al. Bilateral recurrent thigh abscesses for five years after a transobturator tape implantation for stress urinary incontinence. Korean J Urol. 2010;51:657–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shah HN, Gopal HB. Mesh complications in female pelvic floor reconstructive surgery and their management: a systematic review. Indian J Urol. 2012;28(2):129–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hengel AR, Carlson KV. Baverstock RJ prevention, diagnosis, and managment of midurethral mesh sling complications. Can Urol Assoc. 2017;1186(Suppl(2)):135–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    ACOG Committee on Gynecologic practice, American urogynecologic society. Management of mesh and graft complications in gynecologic surgery. Committee opinion no 694. April 2017.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Khatri G, et al. Postoperative imaging after surgical repair for pelvic floor dysfunction. Radiographics. 2016;36(4):1233–56.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wen L, Shek KL, Subramaniam N, Friedman T, Dietz HP. Correlations between sonographic and urodynamic findings after mid urethral sling surgery. J Urol. 2018;199(6):1571–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Manonai J, Rostaminia G, Denson L, Shobeiri SA. Clinical and ultrasonographic study of patients presenting with transvaginal mesh complications. Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35(3):407–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Haylen BT, Freeman RM, Swift SE, Cosson M, Davila GW, Deprest J, et al. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint terminology and classification of the complications related directly to the insertion of prostheses (meshes, implants, tapes); grafts in female pelvic floor surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22(1):3–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Miklos JR, Chinthakanan O, Moore RD, Karp DR, Noqueiras GM, Davilia GW. Indications and complications associated with the removal of 506 pieces of vaginal mesh used in pelvic floor reconstruction: a multicenter study. Surg Technol Int. 2016;29:185–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marcus-Braun N, Bourret A, von Theobald P. Persistent pelvic pain following transvaginal mesh surgery: a cause for mesh removal. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2012;162(2):224–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gyang AN, et al. Managing chronic pelvic pain following reconstructive pelvic surgery with transvaginal mesh. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25(3):313–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Neuman M, et al. Transobturator vs single-incision suburethral mini-slings for treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: early postoperative pain and 3-year follow-up. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2011;18(6):769–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Roth TM. Management of persistent groin pain after transobturator slings. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007;18(11):1371–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cholhan HJ, Hutchings TB, Rooney KE. Dyspareunia associated with paraurethral banding in the transobturator sling. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(5):481.e1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ross S, et al. Transobturator tape versus retropubic tension-free vaginal tape for stress urinary incontinence: 5-year safety and effectiveness outcomes following a randomised trial. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(6):879–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    But I, Faganelj M. Complications and short-term results of two different transobturator techniques for surgical treatment of women with urinary incontinence: a randomized study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19(6):857–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Duckett JR, Jain S. Groin pain after a tension-free vaginal tape or similar suburethral sling: management strategies. BJU Int. 2005;95(1):95–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Duckett J, Baranowski A. Pain after suburethral sling insertion for urinary stress incontinence. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(2):195–201.3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Giamberardino MA, et al. Myofascial pain syndromes and their evaluation. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2011;25(2):185–98.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sternschuss G, Ostergard DR, Patel H. Post-implantation alterations of polypropylene in the human. J Urol. 2012;188(1):27–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nolfi AL, et al. Host response to synthetic mesh in women with mesh complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(2):206.e1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fisher HW, Lotze PM. Nerve injury locations during retropubic sling procedures. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22(4):439–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Achtari C, et al. Anatomical study of the obturator foramen and dorsal nerve of the clitoris and their relationship to minimally invasive slings. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2006;17(4):330–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zoorob D, Karram M. Management of mesh complications and vaginal constriction: a urogynecology perspective. Urol Clin North Am. 2012;39(3):413–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jong K, Popat S, Christie A, Zimmern PE. Is pain relief after vaginal mesh and/or sling removal durable long term? Int Urogynecol J. 2018;29(6):859–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Goodall EJ, Cartwright R, Stratta EC, Jackson SR, Price N. Outcomes after laparoscopic removal of retropubic midurethral slings for chronic pai. Iny Urogynecol J 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-018-3756-6.
  36. 36.
    Boulanger L, et al. Bacteriological analysis of meshes removed for complications after surgical management of urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19(6):827–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lee D, Bacsu C, Zimmern PE. Meshology: a fast-growing field involving mesh and/or tape removal procedures and their outcomes. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2015;12(2):201–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jambusaria LH, Heft J, Reynolds WS, Dmochowski R, Biller DH. Incontinenec rates after midurethral sling revision for vaginal mesh exposure or pain. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215:764e1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Saidan D, Tyagi V, Granitsiotis V, Guerrero K. Outcomes following urinary tract midurethral mesh complications; UKCS-PFS annual meeting, 2018).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecological Association 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynaecologyMedway Maritime HospitalKentUK
  2. 2.Department of General Gynecology and Gynecologic OncologyMedical University of ViennaViennaAustria
  3. 3.Department of UrogynaecologyUniversity Hospitals Plymouth NHS TrustPlymouthUK
  4. 4.Department of UrogynaecologyBirmingham Women’s NHS Foundation TrustEdgbastonUK

Personalised recommendations