Pain Arising from Pelvic Mesh Implants

doi:10.1017/9781108877084.019

Chapter 18 - Pain Arising from Pelvic Mesh Implants

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 March 2021

Ashley L. Gubbels and

Michael Hibner

Edited by

Michael Hibner

Show author details

Michael Hibner: Affiliation:
St Joseph’s Hospital & Medical Center, Phoenix, AZ

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Polypropylene mesh implants have been widely used for treatment of urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. Although they have been shown to be effective in the treatment of these conditions, they also have considerable cost complications including significant and long-lasting pain. Those meshes have been allowed to the market by the FDA without proper research and recently mesh for treatment of pelvic organ prolapse has been taken off the market. In my opinion, the part of the mesh that causes pain is the part that attaches to muscles or pierces through them; therefore it is important to remove that part when treating patients with pain resulting from mesh implants. This is especially important in transobturator meshes where the groin part has to be removed. Meshes that attach to the sacrospinous ligament have a risk of injuring the pudendal nerve, and patients who have developed pain after placement of such a mesh should be treated like patients with pudendal nerve entrapment.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Management of Chronic Pelvic Pain
A Practical Manual
, pp. 182 - 194

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108877084.019 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Wu, JM, Matthews, CA, Conover, MM, Pate, V, Funk, MJ. Lifetime risk of stress incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(6):1201–6.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Foundation for the Global Library of Women’s Medicine. Global Library of Women’s Medicine. 2020.Google Scholar

Petros, P, Papadimitriou, J. Evolution of midurethral and other mesh slings: a critical analysis. Neurourol Urodynam. 2013;32:1–7.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Petros, P. Creating a gold standard surgical device: scientific discoveries leading to TVT and beyond: Ulf Ulmsten Memorial Lecture 2014. Int Urogynecol J. 2015; 26(4):471–6.Google Scholar

Wu, MP, Huang, KH. Tension-free midurethral sling surgeries for stress incontinence. Incont Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;2(2):53–60.Google Scholar

Moore, RD, Miklos, JR. Vaginal mesh kits for pelvic organ prolapse, friend or foe: a comprehensive review. Sci World J. 2009;9:163–89.Google Scholar

MAUDE Database. www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/search.cfm Google Scholar

Shafaat, S, Mangir, N, Regureos, SR, Chapple, CR, MacNeil, S. Demonstration of improved tissue integration and angiogenesis with an elastic, estradiol releasing polyurethane material designed for use in pelvic floor repair. Neurourol Urodyn. 2018;37(2):716–25.Google Scholar

Pelvic floor descent repair with modern mesh implants: the benefits outweigh the acceptable risks. Pfm Medical Ag, 2017.www.pfmmedical.com/en/press/press_releases/pelvic_floor_descent_repair_with_modern_mesh_implants_the_benefits_outweigh_the_acceptable_risks/index.html.Google Scholar

United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. 2017. www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/Pending_MDL_Dockets_By_District-November-15-2017.pdf.Google Scholar

Leone, RMU, Finazzi, AE, Soligo, M, Li Marzi, V, Digesu, A, Serati, M. Long-term outcomes of TOT and TVT procedures for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28(8):1119–30.Google Scholar

Barski, D, Otto, T, Gerullis, H. Systematic review and classification of complications after anterior, posterior, apical, and total vaginal mesh implantation for prolapse repair. Surg Technol Int. 2014;24:214–24.Google Scholar PubMed

Welk, B, AL-Hothi, H, Winick-Ng, J. Removal or revision of vaginal mesh used for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. JAMA Surg. 2015;150(12):1167–75.Google Scholar

Withagen, MI, Vierhourt, ME, Hendriks, JC, Kluivers, KB, Milani, AL. Risk factors for exposure, pain, and dyspareunia after tension-free vaginal mesh procedure. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(3):629–36.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Achtari, C, Hiscock, R, O’Reilly, BA, Schierlitz, L, Dwyer, PL. Risk factors for mesh erosion after transvaginal surgery using polypropylene (Atrium) or composite prolypropylene/polyglactin 910 (Vypro II) mesh. Int Urogynecol J. 2005;16(5): 389–94.Google Scholar

Feola, A, Abramowitch, S, Jallah, Z, Stein, S, Barone, W, Palcsey, S, Moalli, P. Deterioration in biomechanical properties of the vagina following implantation of a high-stiffness prolapse mesh. BJOG. 2013;120(2):224–32.Google Scholar

Brown, BN, Mani, D, Nolfi, AL, Liang, R, Abramowitch, SD, Moalli, PA. Characterization of the host inflammatory response following implantation of prolapse mesh in rhesus macaque. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213(5):668.e1–10.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Nolfi, AL, Brown, BN, Liang, R, Palcsey, SL, Bonidie, MJ, Abramowitch, SD, Moalli, PA. Host response to synthetic mesh in women with mesh complications.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(2):206.e1–8.Google Scholar

Chughtai, B, Sedrakyan, A, Mao, J, et al. Is vaginal mesh a stimulus of autoimmune disease? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216: 495.e1–7.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Lo, TS. One-year outcome of concurrent anterior and posterior transvaginal mesh surgery for treatment of advanced urogenital prolapse: case series. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010;17(4):473–9.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Tervaert, J. Autoinflammatory/autoimmunity syndrome induced by adjuvants (Shoenfeld’s syndrome) in patients after a polypropylene mesh implantation. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2018;32(4):511–20.Google Scholar

Kuuva, N, Nillson, CG. A nationwide analysis of complications associated with the tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) procedure. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002; 81(1):72–7.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Danford, J, Osborn, DJ, Reynolds, WS, Biller, DH, Dmochowski, RR. Postoperative pain outcomes after transvaginal mesh revision. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(1):65–9.Google Scholar

Denson, L, Shobeiri, SA. Three-dimensional endovaginal sonography of synthetic implanted materials in the female pelvic floor. J Ultrasound Med. 2014;33:521–9.Google Scholar

Hokenstad, EK, El-Nashar, SA, Blandon, RE, et al. Health-related quality of life and outcomes after surgical treatment of complications from vaginally placed mesh. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2015;21(3):176–80.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.