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

被引:68
作者
Jia, Xueli [1 ]
Glazener, Cathryn [1 ]
Mowatt, Graham [1 ]
Jenkinson, David [1 ]
Fraser, Cynthia [1 ]
Bain, Christine [2 ]
Burr, Jennifer [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Aberdeen, Hlth Serv Res Unit, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, Scotland
[2] Aberdeen Royal Infirm, NHS Grampian, Aberdeen, Scotland
关键词
Efficacy; Mesh; Mesh erosion; NICE; Pelvic organ prolapsed; Safety; Systematic review; ABDOMINAL SACRAL COLPOPEXY; POSTERIOR INTRAVAGINAL SLINGPLASTY; INFRACOCCYGEAL SACROPEXY; SYNTHETIC MESH; SACROSPINOUS COLPOPEXY; UTEROVAGINAL PROLAPSE; GENITAL PROLAPSE; SACROCOLPOPEXY; COLPOSACROPEXY; COMPLICATIONS;
D O I
10.1007/s00192-010-1156-7
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
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 sacrocolpopenneopexy 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
引用
收藏
页码:1413 / 1431
页数:19
相关论文
共 74 条
[1]  
Adams E., 2004, Cochrane Database Syst Rev, DOI DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD004010.PUB2
[2]   Long-term outcome of abdominal sacrocolpopexy using xenograft compared with synthetic mesh [J].
Altman, D ;
Anzen, B ;
Brismar, S ;
Lopez, A ;
Zetterström, J .
UROLOGY, 2006, 67 (04) :719-724
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2009, Systematic reviews: CRD's guidancefor undertaking reviews in health care
[4]   Abdominal high uterosacral colpopexy and abdominal sacral colpopexy with mesh for pelvic organ prolapse [J].
Bai, SW ;
Kwon, HS ;
Chung, DJ .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY & OBSTETRICS, 2006, 92 (02) :147-148
[5]   Synthetic sling for genital prolapse in young women [J].
Banu, LF .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY & OBSTETRICS, 1997, 57 (01) :57-64
[6]   Abdominal sacrohysteropexy in young women with uterovaginal prolapse: Long-term follow-up [J].
Barranger, E ;
Fritel, X ;
Pigne, A .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2003, 189 (05) :1245-1250
[7]   Incidence and management of abdominal sacrocolpopexy mesh erosions [J].
Begley, JS ;
Kupferman, SP ;
Kuznetsov, DD ;
Kobashi, KC ;
Govier, FE ;
Mcgonigte, KF ;
Muntz, HG .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2005, 192 (06) :1956-1962
[8]   Abdominal sacral suspensions: Analysis of complications using permanent mesh [J].
Bensinger, G ;
Lind, L ;
Lesser, M ;
Guess, M ;
Winkler, HA .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2005, 193 (06) :2094-2098
[9]   Vaginal versus abdominal reconstructive surgery for the treatment of pelvic support defects: A prospective randomized study with long-term outcome evaluation [J].
Benson, JT ;
Lucente, V ;
McClellan, E .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1996, 175 (06) :1418-1421
[10]  
Bradley CS, 2007, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V197