Abstract
The process for introducing new surgical devices differs from drug evaluations. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) often clears medical devices through the 510(k) process, which evaluates safety by substantial equivalence to another device. New drug evaluations, however, assess both premarket efficacy and safety. Transvaginal mesh kits for pelvic organ prolapse were initially cleared in 2004 based on predicate synthetic suburethral slings and hernia mesh. Reported serious complications associated with transvaginal mesh use led to a 2008 FDA public health notification and 2011 safety communication. Subsequently, the FDA issued 522 orders for post-market surveillance data to all manufacturers of transvaginal mesh kits. Some companies ceased transvaginal mesh manufacturing, while others invested millions in research to satisfy these orders. Recently, the American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS) partnered with the FDA, other major medical societies, manufacturers, and representatives from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), to develop the Pelvic Floor Disorders Registry (PFDR), which launched the initial 522 studies. In addition, AUGS and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) published and reaffirmed a committee document on vaginal placement of mesh in 2011 and 2015. In 2012, AUGS published guidelines for credentialing surgeons on transvaginal mesh use. Finally, in 2016, the FDA reclassified vaginal mesh devices from class II to class III, requiring manufacturers to provide premarket data. Careful patient selection, better surgeon training, advances in mesh design, and increased post-market surveillance of transvaginal mesh devices will lead to improved safety, decreased complications, and better long-term outcomes for women.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ward K, Hilton P. Prospective multicentre randomized trial of tension-free vaginal tape and colposuspension as primary treatment for stress incontinence. BMJ. 2002 Jul 13;325(7355):67.
Surgical mesh for treatment of women with pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. FDA Executive Summary, ObGyn Devices Advisory Committee, Sept 8–9, 2011. https://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/20170404140406/https://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/ObstetricsandGynecologyDevices/UCM270402.pdf. Accessed 7 Sept 2017.
Littman PM, Culligan PJ. The rapid evolution of vaginal mesh delivery systems for the correction of pelvic organ prolapse, Part 1: clinical data. The Female Patient. 2009;34:32–8.
Challoner DR, Vodra WW. Medical devices and health—creating a new regulatory framework for moderate-risk devices. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:977–9.
Curfman GD, Redberg RF. Medical devices—balancing regulation and innovation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:975–7.
Rogo-Gupta L, Rodriguez LV, Litwin MS, Herzog TJ, Neugut AI, Lu Y, et al. Trends in surgical mesh use for pelvic organ prolapse from 2000 to 2010. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120(5):1105–15.
Chughtai B, Mao J, Buck J, Kalan S, Sedrakyan A. Use and risks of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery in women in New York state: population based cohort study. BMJ. 2015;350:h2685. Correction: BMJ 2015;350:h3060.
Sedrakyan A, Chughtai B, Mao J. Regulatory warnings and use of surgical mesh in pelvic organ prolapse. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(2):275–7.
FDA strengthens requirements for surgical mesh for the transvaginal repair of pelvic organ prolapse to address safety risks. FDA News Release, 4 Jan 2016. http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm479732.htm. Accessed 7 Sept 2017.
Bradley CS, Visco AG, Weber LeBrun EE, Barber MD. The pelvic floor disorders registry: purpose and development. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2016;22(2):77–82.
Weber LeBrun EE, Adam RA, Barber MD, Boyles SH, Iglesia CB, Lukacz ES, et al. Pelvic floor disorders registry: study design and outcome measures. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2016;22:70–6.
Vaginal placement of synthetic mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. Committee Opinion No. 513. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2011;118:1459–64.
Guideline for providing privileges and credentials to physicians for transvaginal placement of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2012;18:194–6.
Eilber KS, Alperin M, Khan A, Wu N, Pashos CL, Clemens JQ, Anger JT. The role of the surgeon on the outcomes of vaginal prolapse surgery with mesh. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2017;23(5):293–6.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Iglesia, C.B., Alam, P.A. (2019). Vaginal Mesh for Prolapse: An Epidemiologic and Historical Perspective. In: Shobeiri, S. (eds) The Innovation and Evolution of Medical Devices. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97073-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97073-8_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-97072-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-97073-8
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)