Pelvic Organ Prolapse Mesh Graft Revision Surgery: Rates of Complication by Surgical Approach.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Mehr Jain, Jocelyn Stairs, Aisling Clancy
{"title":"Pelvic Organ Prolapse Mesh Graft Revision Surgery: Rates of Complication by Surgical Approach.","authors":"Mehr Jain, Jocelyn Stairs, Aisling Clancy","doi":"10.4293/JSLS.2025.00019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine complication rates after surgery for revision of pelvic organ prolapse mesh grafts, and to compare complication rates by surgical approaches.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective, population-based cohort study was conducted using the American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program database. Patients undergoing mesh revision by gynecology or urology were classified into vaginal, abdominal, or laparoscopic approaches. Patients having a revision of a midurethral sling were excluded. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was completed. The primary outcome was a composite of surgical complications excluding urinary tract infections. Severe Clavien-Dindo IV complications, rates of readmission, rates of reoperation and urinary tract infections were secondary outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1,849 patients, 1,706 underwent vaginal, 78 underwent abdominal, and 65 underwent laparoscopic approach. The composite complication rate, excluding urinary tract infections, was 12.8% in the vaginal group, 21.8% in the abdominal group and 16.9% in the laparoscopic group (<i>P</i> = .052). Compared to a vaginal approach, the abdominal and laparoscopic groups had higher odds of complications (abdominal: adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29-5.70; laparoscopic: adjusted OR 1.48, 95% CI 0.60-3.68). The abdominal and laparoscopic groups had higher odds of readmission compared to the vaginal group (abdominal: adjusted OR 2.36, 95% CI 0.81-6.90; laparoscopic: adjusted OR 4.12, 95% CI 1.49-11.40). Clavien-Dindo IV complications were rare and only seen after vaginal approach (0.4%, n = 6).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Complications were least common after vaginal mesh graft revision surgery, as compared to an abdominal or laparoscopic approach. Serious complications were rare.</p>","PeriodicalId":17679,"journal":{"name":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","volume":"29 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12054618/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2025.00019","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To determine complication rates after surgery for revision of pelvic organ prolapse mesh grafts, and to compare complication rates by surgical approaches.

Methods: A retrospective, population-based cohort study was conducted using the American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program database. Patients undergoing mesh revision by gynecology or urology were classified into vaginal, abdominal, or laparoscopic approaches. Patients having a revision of a midurethral sling were excluded. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was completed. The primary outcome was a composite of surgical complications excluding urinary tract infections. Severe Clavien-Dindo IV complications, rates of readmission, rates of reoperation and urinary tract infections were secondary outcomes.

Results: Of 1,849 patients, 1,706 underwent vaginal, 78 underwent abdominal, and 65 underwent laparoscopic approach. The composite complication rate, excluding urinary tract infections, was 12.8% in the vaginal group, 21.8% in the abdominal group and 16.9% in the laparoscopic group (P = .052). Compared to a vaginal approach, the abdominal and laparoscopic groups had higher odds of complications (abdominal: adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29-5.70; laparoscopic: adjusted OR 1.48, 95% CI 0.60-3.68). The abdominal and laparoscopic groups had higher odds of readmission compared to the vaginal group (abdominal: adjusted OR 2.36, 95% CI 0.81-6.90; laparoscopic: adjusted OR 4.12, 95% CI 1.49-11.40). Clavien-Dindo IV complications were rare and only seen after vaginal approach (0.4%, n = 6).

Conclusion: Complications were least common after vaginal mesh graft revision surgery, as compared to an abdominal or laparoscopic approach. Serious complications were rare.

盆腔器官脱垂网片修复手术:手术入路并发症的发生率。
目的:探讨盆腔器官脱垂网片移植翻修术后的并发症发生率,并比较不同手术入路的并发症发生率。方法:采用美国外科医师学会国家质量改进计划数据库进行回顾性、基于人群的队列研究。通过妇科或泌尿外科进行补片翻修的患者分为阴道、腹部或腹腔镜入路。排除了对中尿道吊带进行翻修的患者。完成多变量logistic回归分析。主要结局是手术并发症的综合,不包括尿路感染。严重的Clavien-Dindo IV并发症、再入院率、再手术率和尿路感染是次要结局。结果:1849例患者中,1706例经阴道入路,78例经腹腔入路,65例经腹腔镜入路。除尿路感染外,阴道组复合并发症发生率为12.8%,腹腔组为21.8%,腹腔镜组为16.9% (P = 0.052)。与阴道入路相比,腹腔组和腹腔镜组出现并发症的几率更高(腹腔:校正优势比[OR] 2.70, 95%可信区间[CI] 1.29-5.70;腹腔镜:调整OR 1.48, 95% CI 0.60-3.68)。与阴道组相比,腹腔组和腹腔镜组再入院的几率更高(腹腔组:调整后OR 2.36, 95% CI 0.81-6.90;腹腔镜:调整OR 4.12, 95% CI 1.49-11.40)。Clavien-Dindo IV并发症罕见,仅在阴道入路后出现(0.4%,n = 6)。结论:与腹部或腹腔镜手术相比,阴道补片翻修手术并发症最少。严重的并发症很少见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
69
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgeons publishes original scientific articles on basic science and technical topics in all the fields involved with laparoscopic, robotic, and minimally invasive surgery. CRSLS, MIS Case Reports from SLS is dedicated to the publication of Case Reports in the field of minimally invasive surgery. The journals seek to advance our understandings and practice of minimally invasive, image-guided surgery by providing a forum for all relevant disciplines and by promoting the exchange of information and ideas across specialties.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信