Posterior intravaginal slingplasty: Efficacy and complications in a continuous series of 118 cases

Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
International Urogynecology Journal (Impact Factor: 1.96). 05/2011; 22(5):611-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-010-1350-7
Source: PubMed


Posterior intravaginal slingplasty (PIVS) is a minimally invasive procedure that aims to suspend vaginal vault. Our study evaluated efficacy and complications of PIVS at long-term follow-up.
One hundred eighteen consecutive women underwent PIVS operation for Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification stage 3 or 4 vaginal cuff prolapse (VCP; 25 patients) or utero-vaginal prolapse (UVP; 93 patients). Apical vaginal wall at stage 0 or 1 was considered as cured.
Follow-up mean duration was 58.6 months (range, 24-84 months). The success rate of PIVS was 96.6%. Some 8.5% mesh erosion (20% in patients with VCP and 5.4% with UVP), 2.5% vaginal-perineal fistula, and 3.4% paravaginal hematoma occurred. Neither erosion nor fistulas occurred with monofilament polypropylene mesh.
PIVS seems a safe and effective procedure for VCP and UVP. Vaginal erosion was mainly observed in patients with VCP treated with multifilament polypropylene mesh.

1 Follower
14 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A 67-year-old lady presented to the surgical outpatient clinic with a 4 month history of recurrent purulent discharge from her left buttock. Four years and 4 months prior to this she underwent a posterior intravaginal slingoplasty for vaginal prolapse and urinary stress incontinence. An MRI demonstrated a long gluteo-vaginal fistula tract from the posterior wall of the vaginal vault through the left ischiorectal fossa to the skin. An examination under anaesthesia revealed that the fistulous tract was surrounding the intact mesh used for the posterior intravaginal slingoplasty. The mesh was removed, the fistula tract excised and the perineal wound marsupialised. The patient was discharged 5 days later. The wound healed within 4 weeks and she remains sepsis free 2 years on.
    Case Reports 10/2011; 2011. DOI:10.1136/bcr.09.2011.4823
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To review current literature on the failures of different surgical approaches in pelvic floor surgery, in particular the use of alloplastic materials, and to analyze complications related to them. A Medline search was performed to retrieve English language literature (from the year 1995 to 2011) on the success rates, failures, and complications profiles of pelvic floor surgery. Search terms used are "pelvic organ prolapse," "stress urinary incontinence," "complications," "vaginal mesh," "mid-urethral slings," and "colposuspension." The review includes surgical techniques for the correction of pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. Failure rates and complications in different studies are compiled and analyzed. Use of synthetic materials in pelvic organ prolapse surgery has reduced surgical failures but it is associated with an increased risk of complications compared to traditional surgical repairs. Synthetic mid-urethral slings for stress urinary incontinence seem to have good success rates over long term, but they have unique complication profile including de novo development of overactive bladder, voiding dysfunction, sling exposures, dyspareunia, and long-term pain. However, some of these complications seem to be related to wrong surgical indications and improper surgical techniques, although some complications may be directly related to the use of synthetic material itself. Use of synthetic materials in pelvic floor surgery has definitely reduced surgical failures, but at the same time, it is associated with an increased risk of complications (some of which are unique to synthetic materials) compared to traditional surgical repairs.
    World Journal of Urology 12/2011; 30(4):487-94. DOI:10.1007/s00345-011-0808-7 · 2.67 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We reviewed the incidence, predisposing factors, presentation and management of complications related to the use of synthetic mesh in the management of stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse repair. Immediate complications, such as bleeding, hematoma, injury to adjacent organs during placement of mesh and complication of voiding dysfunction are not discussed in this review, since they are primarily related to technique. A PubMed search of related articles published in English was done from April 2008 to March 2011. Key words used were urinary incontinence, mesh, complications, midurethral sling, anterior prolapse, anterior vaginal repair, pelvic organ prolapse, transvaginal mesh, vault prolapse, midurethral slings, female stress urinary incontinence, mesh erosion, vaginal mesh complications, and posterior vaginal wall prolapse. Since there were very few articles dealing with the management of mesh-related complications in the period covered in the search we extended the search from January 2005 onwards. Articles were selected to fit the scope of the topic. In addition, landmark publications and Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) data (FDA website) were included on the present topic. A total of 170 articles were identified. The use of synthetic mesh in sub-urethral sling procedures is now considered the standard for the surgical management of stress urinary incontinence. Synthetic mesh is being increasingly used in the management of pelvic organ prolapse. While the incidence of extrusion and erosion with mid-urethral sling is low, the extrusion rate in prolapse repair is somewhat higher and the use in posterior compartment remains controversial. When used through the abdominal approach the extrusion and erosion rates are lower. The management of mesh complication is an individualized approach. The choice of the technique should be based on the type of mesh complication, location of the extrusion and/or erosion, its magnitude, severity and potential recurrence of pelvic floor defect.
    Indian Journal of Urology 04/2012; 28(2):129-53. DOI:10.4103/0970-1591.98453
Show more

Similar Publications