Home Articles & Issues Published Ahead-of-Print CME Collections ABOG MOC II Podcasts Videos Journal Info
Skip Navigation LinksHome > October 2005 - Volume 106 - Issue 4 > Severe Mesh Complications Following Intravaginal Slingplasty
Obstetrics & Gynecology:
doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000177970.52037.0a
Original Research

Severe Mesh Complications Following Intravaginal Slingplasty

Baessler, Kaven MD1; Hewson, Alan D. MD2; Tunn, Ralf MD3; Schuessler, Bernhard MD4; Maher, Christopher F. MD1

Free Access
Article Outline
Collapse Box

Author Information

From the 1Royal Women's, Mater and Wesley Hospitals Brisbane, QLD, Australia; 2Hamilton, NSW, Australia; 3Charité University Hospital Berlin, Germany; and 4Cantonal Hospital Lucerne, Switzerland.

The data provided in this article was presented, in part, as a nondiscussion poster at the 33rd Annual Meeting of the International Continence Society, October 5–9, 2003, in Florence, Italy.

Corresponding author: Dr. Kaven Baessler, Charité University Hospital Berlin, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12200 Berlin, Germany; e-mail: kavenbaessler@aol.com.

Collapse Box

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Synthetic meshes are increasingly used in the management of stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. This report describes severe complications following anterior and/or posterior intravaginal slingplasties employing a multifilament polypropylene mesh.

METHODS: We describe the symptoms, findings, subsequent management, and outcome of 19 consecutive women who have been referred with complications following anterior (n = 11) and/or posterior intravaginal slingplasty (n = 13) employing the multifilament polypropylene tape.

RESULTS: The main indications for removal of the 11 anterior intravaginal slings were intractable mesh infection in 6 women, retropubic abscess with cutaneous sinus in one, and vesico-vaginal fistula in one, intravesical mesh and pain syndrome in one, and voiding difficulties and pain syndrome in two. The main indications for removal of the 13 posterior intravaginal slings were intractable mesh infection in three and pain syndrome and dyspareunia in 10 women. Removal of the slings was performed after a median time of 24 months post-slingplasty. At follow-up between 6 weeks and 6 months, in all women genital pain, chronic vaginal discharge and bleeding, voiding, and defecation difficulties had been markedly alleviated (5) or they had ceased (14). Twelve of 17 sexually active women (71%) resumed sexual intercourse without difficulties. Ten women required subsequent surgery for stress incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse.

CONCLUSION: Surgeons should be aware of the potential complications of synthetic meshes. Until data on the safety and efficacy of the intravaginal slingplasties are available, these procedures cannot be recommended.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III

Synthetic meshes are increasingly used in the surgical management of urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. Although mesh erosion and defective healing after the tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) procedure for stress urinary incontinence using monofilament mesh is rare,1 vaginal mesh erosions after abdominal sacrocolpopexies with multifilament mesh have been reported in up to 12%.2 They usually require local excision and re-epithelialization,2,3 but cases necessitating multiple excisions and removal of the mesh have also been described.3

The original nylon mesh used for the anterior and posterior intravaginal slingplasty (IVS Tunneller; Tyco Healthcare, Norwalk, CT) for stress incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse was associated with tape rejection in 10%.4 A multifilament polypropylene tape was introduced to reduce the incidence of complications with the nylon tape. No cases of rejections or infections have subsequently been reported although the literature on the efficacy and safety of the intravaginal slingplasty and the posterior intravaginal slingplasty in particular is scarce, representing the experiences of 2 surgeons.4,5

This report describes cases of serious complications following anterior and/or posterior intravaginal slingplasty procedures using multifilament polypropylene tape.

Back to Top | Article Outline

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We describe the symptoms, findings, subsequent management, and outcome of 19 women who have been referred to 4 centers from April 2001 to April 2004 for complications following anterior and/or posterior intravaginal slingplasty using multifilament polypropylene tape. These procedures have been described elsewhere.5,6 The authors of this report do not perform intravaginal sling operations. All but 3 patients were referred by general practitioners or gynecologists who were not involved in the surgery. The Human Research Ethics Committee of the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital gave approval for this study.

To determine the significance of the presented complications, we performed a MEDLINE literature search from 1966 to September 2004 with the terms “intravaginal sling,” “intravaginal slingplasty,” “intravaginal slingplasty and infracoccygeal sacropexy.” No language limitations were employed. We also hand-searched the conference proceedings of the International Continence Society for 2002, 2003, and 2004.

Back to Top | Article Outline

RESULTS

The median age was 51 years (range 35–71, mean 53). Six women had an anterior intravaginal sling inserted, 8 women had a posterior, and 5 women had both anterior and posterior intravaginal slings. Five patients had an additional graft overlay, 3 of them Pelvicol (Bard, Covington, GA) and 2 Prolene (Ethicon, Somerville, NJ). Three patients underwent concomitant posterior bridge repair. One woman had a second posterior intravaginal sling inserted for recurrent prolapse.

Table 1 summarizes the symptoms and findings separately for the 11 anterior and 13 posterior intravaginal slings in the 19 women. All women complained of severe pain in the bladder, vagina, or rectum or dyspareunia if sexually active. All women with a posterior intravaginal sling reported buttock/rectal pain aggravated by sitting, defecation, or sexual intercourse. This pain could be reproduced during vaginal and rectal palpation. One woman presented with a urethro-vaginal fistula. Two women had persistent retropubic abscess. In one of these women, the abscess developed into a cutaneous sinus, and in the other, into a vesico-cutaneous fistula draining pus and urine. Nine women presented with intractable mesh erosions and infection: vaginal mesh erosions not responding to antibiotics and oversewing (performed elsewhere up to 4 times), purulent vaginal discharge and bleeding, recurrent urinary tract infections, and severe pain. One of these women had previously had an infected anterior nylon mesh removed, and the new polypropylene intravaginal sling was inserted during the same procedure, which subsequently led to recurrent symptoms consistent with mesh infection. One woman had previously had the posterior intravaginal sling trimmed for a perineal erosion and presented with persistent vaginal/rectal pain and clinical signs of mesh infection.

Table 1
Table 1
Image Tools

The median time to commencement of symptoms after the initial intravaginal sling procedure was 1 month (range up to 12 months). Surgery to remove the mesh was performed after a median time of 24 months (range 10 weeks–36 months). Preoperative investigations included urodynamics, barium enema, pelvic and abdominal ultrasound examination, intravenous pyelograms, and colonoscopy, as appropriate. All women were given prophylactic antibiotics during the sling removal. The main indications for removal of the 11 anterior intravaginal slings were intractable mesh infection in 6 women, retropubic abscess with cutaneous sinus in 1 woman, vesico-vaginal fistula in 1 woman, intravesical mesh and pain syndrome in 1 woman, and voiding difficulties and pain syndrome in 2 women. The main indications for removal of the 13 posterior intravaginal slings were intractable mesh infection in 3 women and pain syndrome and dyspareunia in 10 women.

The anterior intravaginal slings were removed vaginally in 4 women, combined vaginally-laparoscopically in 4 women and combined vaginally-open-abdominally in 3 women. All posterior intravaginal slings were partially or completely removed vaginally. In 2 women the Prolene mesh had also eroded into the vagina and was removed concomitantly. The Pelvicol mesh was not clearly distinguishable as a structure and was probably partly removed within substantial scar tissue. No complications occurred during the removal of the mesh. The median operating time was 60 minutes (range 20–125). The removed mesh and adjacent tissue was sent for histopathology in 8 women and revealed acute and chronic inflammation (large amount of neutrophils present as well as foreign body giant cells).

At follow-up between 6 weeks and 6 months, in all women, genital pain, chronic discharge and bleeding, voiding and defecation difficulties had been markedly alleviated (n = 5) or had ceased (n = 14). Twelve of 17 sexually active women (71%) resumed sexual intercourse without difficulties. Ten women required subsequent surgery for stress incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse, including Burch colposuspension in 3 women, tension-free vaginal tape in 1 woman, transobturator tape in 1 woman, anterior and/or posterior repairs in 7 women, sacrospinous colpopexy in 1 woman, and sacrocolpopexy in 2 women. One woman had a significantly shortened and narrowed vagina and underwent a vaginoplasty to restore adequate vaginal capacity.

Back to Top | Article Outline

DISCUSSION

We report a series of mesh infections and pain syndromes following anterior and posterior intravaginal slingplasty with the new multifilament polypropylene mesh. All necessitated surgical interventions because of symptoms debilitating to the patient's quality of life. The exact incidence of these complications remains unclear because of the unknown denominator.

There is a paucity of published data on the efficacy and safety of both the employed mesh and the surgical technique, particularly for the posterior intravaginal sling. The MEDLINE search revealed 8 clinical trials; 5 of them were personal case series of one surgeon.5–9 Six articles assessed the anterior intravaginal slingplasty (n = 240),6–11 including one randomized controlled trial comparing the anterior intravaginal slingplasty and the tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) procedure, with similar results.10 Two trials reported on the efficacy of the posterior intravaginal slingplasty (n = 168) without formal quality-of-life assessment.4,5 Petros described one mesh rejection and mesh erosions in 4 of 71 patients requiring surgical intervention.5 There was also one case report on a suburethral vaginal erosion and pyogenic granuloma formation after anterior intravaginal slingplasty.12 We were unable to find any independent (third party) prospective follow-up studies or randomized controlled trials of the posterior intravaginal slingplasty. There were 2 abstracts on the intravaginal slingplasty published in the conference proceedings of the International Continence Society 2004 (Pifarotti P, Meschia M, Gattei U, Bernasconi F, Magatti F, Viganò R. Multicenter randomized trial of tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) and intravaginal slingplasty (IVS) for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women. Neurourol Urodynam 2004;23:494; and Krause H, Goh J, Khoo SK, Williams R, Galloway S. Biocompatible properties of surgical mesh using an animal model. Neurourol Urodynam 2004;23:425). A randomized trial of the TVT procedure and anterior intravaginal slingplasty, while demonstrating similar success rates for stress urinary incontinence, reported a 9% intravaginal slingplasty-mesh erosion rate; all but one subject required removal of the intravaginal slingplasty (Pifarotti et al, 2004). The other study described more fibrosis and foreign body giant cells around the intravaginal slingplasty tape as compared with the TVT (Krause et al, 2004).

According to Amid's classification for mesh used in abdominal hernia repairs, the intravaginal sling tape consists of a type III polypropylene mesh, which is a macroporous mesh with multifilamentous components. Because the small interstices of the mesh (less than 10 microns), bacteria might infiltrate but cannot be eliminated by macrophages, which are too large to enter the pores and interstices, therefore contributing to infection.13 This might explain the cases of persistent infection of the intravaginal sling mesh. In comparison, the tension-free vaginal tape is a type I macroporous and monofilament polypropylene mesh, which allows also macrophages to infiltrate. An infection is unlikely, and if present, it can be treated with antibiotics. Complications of the tension-free vaginal tape are well described, and infections or rejections are rare.14

Apart from the multifilament mesh used in intravaginal sling procedures, the route of mesh insertion has also to be considered, particularly for the posterior intravaginal sling. It is known, that vaginal suture and mesh placement in sacrocolpopexies result in a significantly higher erosion rate (20% versus 4% if inserted abdominally).3 Another possible confounder is the lack of a plastic sheath protecting the mesh during insertion until placed in the correct position. Rates of potential risk factors like age, parity, smoking, body mass index, chronic bronchitis/asthma, diabetes mellitus, and previous and concomitant operations were similar to those of cohorts of urogynecology patients in tertiary referral centers (data not presented).15 No woman had a known autoimmune disease.

The main indication for removal of the posterior intravaginal slings was severe pain, especially during defecation and sexual intercourse. The exact origin of this pain syndrome is not clear, but the lack of plastic deformation or high stiffness16 of the intravaginal sling and the marked fibrosis surrounding the mesh (Krause et al, 2004) might contribute. However, in women who received additional Pelvicol or Prolene mesh, it can be difficult to distinguish the origin of the pathologies.

As the insertion of synthetic meshes in gynecologic surgery is gaining in popularity, surgeons should be aware of these potential complications that are probably associated with vaginal-perineal mesh placement and the use of multifilament mesh. Until further data on the safety and efficacy of the intravaginal sling techniques and the type of mesh used is available, these procedures cannot be recommended and should be used in controlled clinical trials only.

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCES

1. Karram MM, Segal JL, Vassallo BJ, Kleeman SD. Complications and untoward effects of the tension-free vaginal tape procedure. Obstet Gynecol 2003;101:929–32.

2. Kohli N, Walsh PM, Roat TW, Karram MM. Mesh erosion after abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Obstet Gynecol 1998;92: 999–1004.

3. Visco AG, Weidner AC, Barber MD, Myers ER, Cundiff GW, Bump RC, et al. Vaginal mesh erosion after abdominal sacral colpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;184:297–302.

4. Farnsworth BN. Posterior intravaginal slingplasty (infracoccygeal sacropexy) for severe posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse-a preliminary report on efficacy and safety. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2002;13:4–8.

5. Petros PE. Vault prolapse II: Restoration of dynamic vaginal supports by infracoccygeal sacropexy, an axial day-case vaginal procedure. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2001; 12:296–303.

6. Petros PP. The intravaginal slingplasty operation, a minimally invasive technique for cure of urinary incontinence in the female. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1996;36:453–61.

7. Petros PP. Medium-term follow-up of the intravaginal slingplasty operation indicates minimal deterioration of urinary continence with time. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1999;39: 354–6.

8. Petros PE. New ambulatory surgical methods using an anatomical classification of urinary dysfunction improve stress, urge and abnormal emptying. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 1997;8:270–7.

9. Papa Petros PE. Cure of urinary and fecal incontinence by pelvic ligament reconstruction suggests a connective tissue etiology for both. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 1999;10:356–60.

10. Rechberger T, Rzezniczuk K, Skorupski P, Adamiak A, Tomaszewski J, Baranowski W, et al. A randomized comparison between monofilament and multifilament tapes for stress incontinence surgery. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2003;14:432–6.

11. Plachta Z, Adamiak A, Jankiewicz K, Skorupski P, Rechberger T. Quality of life after mid-urethra polypropylene tape sling surgery (IVS, TVT) in female stress urinary incontinence [in Polish]. Ginekol Pol 2003;74:986–91.

12. Lim YN, Rane A. Suburethral vaginal erosion and pyogenic granuloma formation: an unusual complication of intravaginal slingplasty (IVS). Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2004;15:56–8.

13. Amid PK. Classification of biomaterials and their related complications in abdominal wall hernia surgery. Hernia 1997;1:15–21.

14. Boublil V, Ciofu C, Traxer O, Sebe P, Haab F. Complications of urethral sling procedures. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2002;14:515–20.

15. Meschia M, Buonaguidi A, Pifarotti P, Somigliana E, Spennacchio M, Amicarelli F. Prevalence of anal incontinence in women with symptoms of urinary incontinence and genital prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 2002;100:719–23.

16. Dietz HP, Vancaillie P, Svehla M, Walsh W, Steensma AB, Vancaillie TG. Mechanical properties of urogynecologic implant materials. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2003;14:239–243.

Cited By:

This article has been cited 63 time(s).

International Urogynecology Journal
Rectocutaneous fistula: a rare complication of the posterior intravaginal sling
Yee, YH; Lu, CC; Kung, FT; Huang, KH
International Urogynecology Journal, 19(4): 599-601.
10.1007/s00192-007-0460-3
CrossRef
International Urogynecology Journal
Complications from vaginally placed mesh in pelvic reconstructive surgery
Blandon, RE; Gebhart, JB; Trabuco, EC; Klingele, CJ
International Urogynecology Journal, 20(5): 523-531.
10.1007/s00192-009-0818-9
CrossRef
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology
New Considerations in the Use of Vaginal Mesh for Prolapse Repair
Rardin, CR; Washington, BB
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, 16(3): 360-364.
10.1016/j.jmig.2009.01.004
CrossRef
Geburtshilfe Und Frauenheilkunde
Life-Threatening Pelvis/Leg Phlegmon Six Years after Stress Urinary Incontinence Surgery - A Case Report
Fink, T; Abel, I; Muller, K; Fischer, A
Geburtshilfe Und Frauenheilkunde, 69(9): 861-863.
10.1055/s-0029-1186015
CrossRef
International Journal of Impotence Research
Impact of gynecological surgery on female sexual function
Pauls, RN
International Journal of Impotence Research, 22(2): 105-114.
10.1038/ijir.2009.63
CrossRef
European Journal of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Infracoccygeal sacropexy reinforced with posterior mesh interposition for apical and posterior compartment prolapse
Sentilhes, L; Sergent, F; Resch, B; Verspyck, E; Descamps, P; Marpeau, L
European Journal of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 137(1): 108-113.
10.1016/j.ejogrb.2007.10.011
CrossRef
Obstetrics and Gynecology
Atypical Graft Infection Presenting as a Remote Draining Sinus
Karp, D; Apostolis, C; Lefevre, R; Davila, GW
Obstetrics and Gynecology, 114(2): 443-445.

International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
Infracoccygeal sacropexy for uterovaginal prolapse
Deffieux, X; Desseaux, K; de Tayrac, R; Faivre, E; Frydrnan, R; Fernandez, H
International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 104(1): 56-59.
10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.08.013
CrossRef
International Urogynecology Journal
Xenograft use in reconstructive pelvic surgery: a review of the literature
Trabuco, EC; Klingele, CJ; Gebhart, JB
International Urogynecology Journal, 18(5): 555-563.
10.1007/s00192-006-0288-2
CrossRef
International Urogynecology Journal
Follow-up after polypropylene mesh repair of anterior and posterior compartments in patients with recurrent prolapse
Gauruder-Burmester, A; Koutouzidou, P; Rohne, J; Gronewold, M; Tunn, R
International Urogynecology Journal, 18(9): 1059-1064.
10.1007/s00192-006-0291-7
CrossRef
International Urogynecology Journal
The integral theory of continence
Petros, PEP; Woodman, PJ
International Urogynecology Journal, 19(1): 35-40.
10.1007/s00192-007-0475-9
CrossRef
Thescientificworldjournal
Vaginal Mesh Kits for Pelvic Organ Prolapse, Friend or Foe: A Comprehensive Review
Moore, RD; Miklos, JR
Thescientificworldjournal, 9(): 163-189.
10.1100/tsw.2009.19
CrossRef
European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
The posterior intravaginal slingplasty operation: Results of the Austrian registry
Bjelic-Radisic, V; Hartmann, G; Abendstein, B; Tamussino, K; Riss, PA
European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 144(1): 88-91.
10.1016/j.ejogrb.2009.02.003
CrossRef
International Urogynecology Journal
Gluteo-vaginal fistula after posterior intravaginal slingplasty: a case report
Grynberg, M; Teyssedre, J; Staerman, F
International Urogynecology Journal, 20(7): 877-879.
10.1007/s00192-008-0763-z
CrossRef
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Complications requiring reoperation following vaginal mesh kit procedures for prolapse
Margulies, RU; Lewicky-Gaupp, C; Fenner, DE; McGuire, EJ; Clemens, JQ; DeLancey, JOL
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 199(6): -.
ARTN 678.e1
CrossRef
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Early experience with mesh excision for adverse outcomes after transvaginal mesh placement using prolapse kits
Ridgeway, B; Walters, MD; Paraiso, MFR; Barber, MD; McAchran, SE; Goldman, HB; Jelovsek, JE
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 199(6): -.
ARTN 703.e1
CrossRef
European Journal of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Mesh-related infections after pelvic organ prolapse repair surgery
Falagas, ME; Velakoulis, S; Iavazzo, C; Athanasiou, S
European Journal of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 134(2): 147-156.
10.1016/j.ejogrb.2007.02.024
CrossRef
International Urogynecology Journal
Review of synthetic mesh-related complications in pelvic floor reconstructive surgery
Bako, A; Dhar, R
International Urogynecology Journal, 20(1): 103-111.
10.1007/s00192-008-0717-5
CrossRef
Lancet
Pelvic organ prolapse
Jelovsek, JE; Maher, C; Barber, MD
Lancet, 369(): 1027-1038.

International Urogynecology Journal
Infected midurethral tape presenting as an ischiorectal abscess
Jha, S; Radley, S; Shorthouse, A
International Urogynecology Journal, 19(6): 877-879.
10.1007/s00192-007-0528-0
CrossRef
British Journal of Surgery
Mesh for hernia repair
Klinge, U
British Journal of Surgery, 95(5): 539-540.
10.1002/bjs.6159
CrossRef
Maturitas
Advances in laparoscopic techniques in pelvic reconstructive surgery for prolapse and incontinence
Price, N; Jackson, SR
Maturitas, 62(3): 276-280.
10.1016/j.maturitas.2009.01.010
CrossRef
Central European Journal of Medicine
Recurrent suprapubic abscess and vaginal fistula after anterior intravaginal slingplasty
Gungor, F; Yalcin, O
Central European Journal of Medicine, 4(1): 134-137.
10.2478/s11536-008-0040-z
CrossRef
Obstetrics and Gynecology
Severe mesh complications following intravaginal slingplasty
Richardson, PA
Obstetrics and Gynecology, 107(2): 422.

International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
Actinomyces-like organisms from a vaginal granuloma following intravaginal slingplasty with polypropylene mesh
Junior, JE; Giraldo, PC; Cavalcante, DIM; Goncalves, AKS; Giraldo, HPD
International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 102(2): 172-173.
10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.03.005
CrossRef
Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Efficacy and safety of transvaginal mesh kits in the treatment of prolapse of the vaginal apex: a systematic review
Feiner, B; Jelovsek, JE; Maher, C
Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 116(1): 15-24.
10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.02023.x
CrossRef
Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Laparoscopic hysteropexy: the initial results of a uterine suspension procedure for uterovaginal prolapse
Price, N; Slack, A; Jackson, SR
Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 117(1): 62-68.
10.1111/j.1471-0528.2009.02396.x
CrossRef
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Anterior intravaginal slingplasty tunneller device for stress incontinence and posterior intravaginal slingplasty for apical vault prolapse: a 2-year prospective multicenter study
Vardy, MD; Brodman, M; Olivera, CK; Zhou, HS; Flisser, AJ; Bercik, RS
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 197(1): -.
ARTN 104.e1
CrossRef
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Sexual function after vaginal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence
Pauls, RN; Silva, A; Rooney, CM; Siddighi, S; Kleeman, SD; Dryfhout, V; Karram, MM
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 197(6): -.
ARTN 622.e1
CrossRef
International Urogynecology Journal
Long-term follow-up of intravaginal slingplasty operation for urinary stress incontinence
Glavind, K; Larsen, T
International Urogynecology Journal, 19(8): 1081-1083.
10.1007/s00192-008-0579-x
CrossRef
International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
The use of graft materials in vaginal pelvic floor surgery
Huebner, M; Hsu, Y; Fenner, DE
International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 92(3): 279-288.
10.1016/j.ijgo.2005.11.005
CrossRef
European Urology
Women's sexual dysfunction: A review of the "surgical landscape"
Salonia, A; Brigand, A; Deho, F; Zanni, G; Rigatti, P; Montorsi, F
European Urology, 50(1): 44-52.
10.1016/j.eururo.2006.03.039
CrossRef
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Histologic response of porcine collagen-coated and uncoated polypropylene grafts in a rabbit vagina model
Huffaker, RK; Muir, TW; Rao, A; Baumann, SS; Kuehl, TJ; Pierce, LM
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 198(5): -.
ARTN 582.e1
CrossRef
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Biomechanical properties of synthetic and biologic graft materials following long-term implantation in the rabbit abdomen and vagina
Pierce, LM; Grunlan, MA; Hou, YP; Baumann, SS; Kuehl, TJ; Muir, TW
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 200(5): -.
ARTN 549.e1
CrossRef
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women
Maher, C; Feiner, B; Baessler, K; Adams, EJ; Hagen, S; Glazener, CMA
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (4): -.
ARTN CD004014
CrossRef
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Re: Midurethral Tissue Fixation System sling - a 'micromethod' for cure of stress incontinence - preliminary report and Tissue Fixation System posterior sling for repair of uterine/vault prolapse - a preliminary report
Dietz, HP
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 46(2): 174.

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) and intravaginal slingplasty (IVS) for stress urinary incontinence: A multicenter randomized trial
Meschia, M; Pifarotti, P; Bernasconi, F; Magatti, F; Vigano, R; Bertozzi, R; Barbacini, P
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 195(5): 1338-1342.
10.1016/j.ajog.2006.03.067
CrossRef
Urology
Vesicovaginal fistula and mesh erosion after perigee (transobturator polypropylene mesh anterior repair)
Yamada, BS; Govier, FE; Stefanovic, KB; Kobashi, KC
Urology, 68(5): -.
ARTN 1121.e5
CrossRef
International Urogynecology Journal
A long-term review of posterior colporrhaphy with Vypro 2 mesh
Lim, YN; Muller, R; Corstiaans, A; Hitchins, S; Barry, C; Rane, A
International Urogynecology Journal, 18(9): 1053-1057.
10.1007/s00192-006-0290-8
CrossRef
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Sling distress: A subanalysis of the IVS tapes from the SUSPEND trial
Balakrishnan, S; Lim, YN; Barry, C; Corstiaans, A; Kannan, K; Rane, A
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 47(6): 496-498.
10.1111/j.1479-828X.2007.00786.x
CrossRef
International Urogynecology Journal
Gluteo-vaginal sinus formation complicating posterior intravaginal slingplasty followed by successful IVS removal. A case report and review of the literature
Mikos, T; Tsalikis, T; Papanikolaou, A; Pournaropoulos, F; Bontis, JN
International Urogynecology Journal, 19(3): 449-452.
10.1007/s00192-007-0454-1
CrossRef
International Urogynecology Journal
Multiple perineal abscesses and sinus tracts as a complication of vaginal mesh
Lewicky-Gaupp, C; McGuire, EJ; Fenner, DE
International Urogynecology Journal, 20(9): 1137-1139.
10.1007/s00192-009-0816-y
CrossRef
Acta Biomaterialia
Chemical, biological and microbiological evaluation of cyclodextrin finished polyamide inguinal meshes
El Ghoul, Y; Blanchemain, N; Laurent, T; Campagne, C; El Achari, A; Roudesli, S; Morcellet, M; Martel, B; Hildebrand, HF
Acta Biomaterialia, 4(5): 1392-1400.
10.1016/j.actbio.2008.02.019
CrossRef
Journal De Gynecologie Obstetrique Et Biologie De La Reproduction
Transobturator subvesical mesh: Tolerance and mild-term results. A prospective study
Kdous, M; Zhioua, F
Journal De Gynecologie Obstetrique Et Biologie De La Reproduction, 37(8): 758-769.
10.1016/j.jgyn.2008.09.002
CrossRef
Neurourology and Urodynamics
Attachment of a Sling Rescue Suture to Midurethral Tape for Management of Potential Postoperative Voiding Dysfunction
Shobeiri, SA; Nihira, MA
Neurourology and Urodynamics, 28(8): 990-994.
10.1002/nau.20734
CrossRef
Obstetrics and Gynecology
Severe mesh complications following intravaginal slingplasty
Molloy, WB
Obstetrics and Gynecology, 107(2): 423.

Obstetrics and Gynecology
Retroperitoneal hemorrhage after a vaginal mesh prolapse procedure
Gangam, N; Kanee, A
Obstetrics and Gynecology, 110(2): 463-464.

Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Abdominal vault suspension with rectus sheath strips: a case series
Gayen, A; Rymer, M; Pakarian, F; Mastoroudes, H
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 28(8): 787-790.
10.1080/01443610802552017
CrossRef
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology
Novel application of polypropylene sling: Transvaginal cervicoisthmic cerclage in women with high risk of preterm delivery
Deffieux, X; De Tayrac, R; Louafi, N; Gervaise, A; Bonnet, K; Frydman, R; Fernandez, H
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, 13(3): 216-221.
10.1016/j.jmig.2006.01.005
CrossRef
Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Laparoscopic uterine sling suspension: a new technique of uterine suspension in women desiring surgical management of uterine prolapse with uterine conservation
Cutner, A; Kearney, R; Vashisht, A
Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 114(9): 1159-1162.
10.1111/i.1471-0528.2007.01416.x
CrossRef
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Long-term histologic response to synthetic and biologic graft materials implanted in the vagina and abdomen of a rabbit model
Pierce, LM; Rao, A; Baumann, SS; Glassberg, JE; Kuehl, TJ; Muir, TW
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 200(5): -.
ARTN 546.e1
CrossRef
Urologe
Vaginal pelvic repair. Always with mesh or not?
Loertzer, H; Ringert, RH; Fechner, A; Thelen, P; Kummel, C; Strauss, A
Urologe, 48(9): 1038-1043.
10.1007/s00120-009-2080-7
CrossRef
International Urogynecology Journal
Urethrovaginal fistula - a rare complication after the placement of a suburethral sling (IVS)
Reisenauer, C; Wallwiener, D; Stenzl, A; Solomayer, FE; Sievert, KD
International Urogynecology Journal, 18(3): 343-346.
10.1007/s00192-006-0139-1
CrossRef
Yonsei Medical Journal
Use of grafts in pelvic reconstructive surgery
Jeon, MJ; Bai, SW
Yonsei Medical Journal, 48(2): 147-156.

International Urogynecology Journal
Analysis of risk factors associated with vaginal erosion after synthetic sling procedures for stress urinary incontinence
Chen, HY; Ho, M; Hung, YC; Huang, LC
International Urogynecology Journal, 19(1): 117-121.
10.1007/s00192-007-0400-2
CrossRef
Regenerative Medicine
Isolation of fibroblasts for coating of meshes for reconstructive surgery: differences between mesh types
Skala, CE; Petry, IB; Gebhard, S; Hengstler, JG; Albrich, SB; Maltaris, T; Naumann, G; Koelbl, H
Regenerative Medicine, 4(2): 197-204.
10.2217/17460751.4.2.197
CrossRef
Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology
Repair of vaginal vault prolapse and pelvic floor relaxation using polypropylene mesh
Mourtzinos, A; Raz, S
Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 18(5): 555-559.
10.1097/01.gco.0000242960.70985.c2
PDF (82) | CrossRef
Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology
Mesh augmentation during pelvic-floor reconstructive surgery: risks and benefits
Baessler, K; Maher, CF
Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 18(5): 560-566.
10.1097/01.gco.0000242961.48114.b0
PDF (210) | CrossRef
Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology
Introduction of newer surgical prostheses and procedures in pelvic reconstruction: a challenge for pelvic surgeons
Ho, MH; Bhatia, NN
Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 19(5): 461-463.
10.1097/GCO.0b013e3282f09edd
PDF (62) | CrossRef
Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology
Update on the utilization of grafts in pelvic reconstruction surgeries
Le, TH; Kon, L; Bhatia, NN; Ostergard, DR
Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 19(5): 480-489.
10.1097/GCO.0b013e3282efdecd
PDF (179) | CrossRef
Current Opinion in Urology
Management of the complications of the synthetic slings
Deval, B; Haab, F
Current Opinion in Urology, 16(4): 240-243.
10.1097/01.mou.0000232043.95427.d6
PDF (110) | CrossRef
Obstetrics & Gynecology
Graft Use in Transvaginal Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair: A Systematic Review
for the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons Systematic Review Group, ; Sung, VW; Rogers, RG; Schaffer, JI; Balk, EM; Uhlig, K; Lau, J; Abed, H; Wheeler, TL; Morrill, MY; Clemons, JL; Rahn, DD; Lukban, JC; Lowenstein, L; Kenton, K; Young, SB
Obstetrics & Gynecology, 112(5): 1131-1142.
10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181898ba9
PDF (325) | CrossRef
Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey
Biologic and Synthetic Graft Use in Pelvic Surgery: A Review
Jakus, SM; Shapiro, A; Hall, CD
Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey, 63(4): 253-266.
10.1097/OGX.0b013e318166fb44
PDF (485) | CrossRef
Back to Top | Article Outline

© 2005 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Login

Article Tools

Images

Share