Is transvaginal mesh procedure a potential measure for pelvic organ prolapse repair when performed by expert surgeons?

Objectives

The aim of this study was to verify the safety and efficacy of transvaginal mesh by analyzing the 2-year follow-up data of patients performed by a surgeon with a high volume of procedures.

Methods

A total of 617 patients with pelvic organ prolapse underwent transvaginal mesh by a single surgeon. Complications and anatomical status of each patient were examined up to 24?months after surgery. Risk factors for the recurrence were also analyzed.

Results

Regarding complications, we experienced 10 patients (3.8%) of bladder injuries in anterior transvaginal mesh and eight (3.4%) in anterior and posterior transvaginal mesh. Massive blood loss was observed in four patients, but there was no case of blood transfusion. Mesh exposures were seen in seven patients (1.2%). A total of 100 patients (16.2%) had prolapse recurrence, defined as the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System stage??II. As to recurrences on the operated compartments, we observed five patients (2.0%) for anterior transvaginal mesh, three (6.5%) for posterior transvaginal mesh, five (7.4%) for combined transvaginal mesh, and 31 (14.2%) in anterior and posterior transvaginal mesh. Regarding Point C before operation in the anterior and posterior transvaginal mesh, the recurrence rates were more than 23% in patients with a Point C of 4 or more. Binominal regression analyses showed that higher body mass index, younger age, and higher stage of uterine prolapse were significant risk factors.

Conclusions

The transvaginal mesh surgery is safe when conducted by experts. However, the recurrence rate may exceed 20% for high-stage uterine prolapse even when conducted by experts.