Search

The introduction of the tensionfree vaginal tape in 1995 drastically changed the landscape of surgical procedures for stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Because of the uncomplicated technique many urologists and gynecologists embraced the procedure with tripled the number of annual procedures in the beginning of this century. At the same time polypropylene was used for the development of surgical procedures of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Especially the use of polypropylene for POP has caused many severe clinical complications. This caused a huge reduction of these kind of surgical procedures and it is performed nowadays only under strict conditions. At the same time the use of polypropylene for SUI was scrutinized and questioned. Nowadays, in the Ango-Saxon countries the use of polypropylene tapes for SUI is not recommended. This manuscript explores the role of polypropylene tapes for SUI. Questions that are dealt with are: How dangerous are polypropylene tapes anyway? What are the alternatives? Which factors contribute to a successful outcome of stress incontinence surgery? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To prospectively explore the clinical application of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and fibre tractography in evaluating the pelvic floor.Methods: Ten patients with pelvic organ prolapse, ten with pelvic floor symptoms and ten asymptomatic women were included. A two-dimensional (2D) spin-echo (SE) echo-planar imaging (EPI) sequence of the pelvic floor was acquired. Offline fibre tractography and morphological analysis of pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were performed. Inter-rater agreement for quality assessment of fibre tracking results was evaluated using weighted kappa (κ). From agreed tracking results, eigen values (λ1, λ2, λ3), mean diffusivity (MD) and fractional anisotropy (FA) were calculated. MD and FA values were compared using ANOVA. Inter-rater reliability of DTI parameters was interpreted using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC).Results: Substantial inter-rater agreement was found (κ = 0.71 [95% CI 0.63-0.78]). Four anatomical structures were reliably identified. Substantial inter-rater agreement was found for MD and FA (ICC 0.60-0.91). No significant differences between groups were observed for anal sphincter, perineal body and puboperineal muscle. A significant difference in FA was found for internal obturator muscle between the prolapse group and the asymptomatic group (0.27 ± 0.05 vs 0.22 ± 0.03; P = 0.015).Conclusion: DTI with fibre tractography permits identification of part of the clinically relevant pelvic structures. Overall, no significant differences in DTI parameters were found between groups.Key Points: Diffusion tensor MRI offers new insights into female pelvic floor problems. DTI allows 3D visualisation and quantification of female pelvic floor anatomy. DTI parameters from pelvic floor structures can be reliably determined. No significant differences in DTI parameters between groups with/without prolapse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients who undergo surgery because of genital prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence can be treated by a combination of surgical procedures via a unified route. We performed a retrospective study among 47 patients to compare micturition, defecation and prolapse symptoms after surgery, as well as duration of hospital stay and complication rate between patients who underwent a unified vaginal or abdominal surgical correction. All patients were treated between January 1995 and December 1997 in the University Medical Center Utrecht or St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, The Netherlands. Abdominal surgery was associated with a higher prevalence of difficulty in bladder emptying (relative risk (RR) 2.3 (95% CI 1.4–8.4)), fecal incontinence (RR 3.4, CI 1.1–10.7) and soiling (OR 2.8, CI 1.2–6.2), as well as with a longer postoperative hospital stay (8.6 vs 7.3 days) and a higher complication rate (25.0% vs. 11.4%) than vaginal surgery. These results suggest that a unified vaginal surgical correction of genital prolapse and coexisting stress incontinence appears to be preferable to a unified abdominal surgical correction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: With this retrospective case series, we aim to identify predictors for reduction of pain after mesh revision surgery in patients operated for inguinal hernia or pelvic organ prolapse with a polypropylene implant. Identifying these predictors may aid surgeons to counsel patients and select appropriate candidates for mesh revision surgery.Clinical records before and after mesh revision surgery from 221 patients with chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) and 59 patients with pain after pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery were collected at two experienced tertiary referral centers. Primary outcome was patient reported improvement of pain after revision surgery. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to specify predictors for pain reduction.The multivariable logistic regression was performed for each patient group separately. Patients with CPIP had higher chances of improvement of pain when time between mesh placement and mesh revision surgery was longer, with an OR of 1.19 per year. A turning point in chances of risks and benefits was demonstrated at 70 months, with improved outcomes for patients with revision surgery ≥ 70 months (OR 2.86). For POP patients, no statistically significant predictors for reduction of pain after (partial) removal surgery could be identified.A longer duration of at least 70 months between implantation of inguinal mesh and revision surgery seems to give a higher chance on improvement of pain. Caregivers should not avoid surgery based on a longer duration of symptoms when an association between symptoms and the location of the mesh is found.Methods: With this retrospective case series, we aim to identify predictors for reduction of pain after mesh revision surgery in patients operated for inguinal hernia or pelvic organ prolapse with a polypropylene implant. Identifying these predictors may aid surgeons to counsel patients and select appropriate candidates for mesh revision surgery.Clinical records before and after mesh revision surgery from 221 patients with chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) and 59 patients with pain after pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery were collected at two experienced tertiary referral centers. Primary outcome was patient reported improvement of pain after revision surgery. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to specify predictors for pain reduction.The multivariable logistic regression was performed for each patient group separately. Patients with CPIP had higher chances of improvement of pain when time between mesh placement and mesh revision surgery was longer, with an OR of 1.19 per year. A turning point in chances of risks and benefits was demonstrated at 70 months, with improved outcomes for patients with revision surgery ≥ 70 months (OR 2.86). For POP patients, no statistically significant predictors for reduction of pain after (partial) removal surgery could be identified.A longer duration of at least 70 months between implantation of inguinal mesh and revision surgery seems to give a higher chance on improvement of pain. Caregivers should not avoid surgery based on a longer duration of symptoms when an association between symptoms and the location of the mesh is found.Results: With this retrospective case series, we aim to identify predictors for reduction of pain after mesh revision surgery in patients operated for inguinal hernia or pelvic organ prolapse with a polypropylene implant. Identifying these predictors may aid surgeons to counsel patients and select appropriate candidates for mesh revision surgery.Clinical records before and after mesh revision surgery from 221 patients with chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) and 59 patients with pain after pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery were collected at two experienced tertiary referral centers. Primary outcome was patient reported improvement of pain after revision surgery. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to specify predictors for pain reduction.The multivariable logistic regression was performed for each patient group separately. Patients with CPIP had higher chances of improvement of pain when time between mesh placement and mesh revision surgery was longer, with an OR of 1.19 per year. A turning point in chances of risks and benefits was demonstrated at 70 months, with improved outcomes for patients with revision surgery ≥ 70 months (OR 2.86). For POP patients, no statistically significant predictors for reduction of pain after (partial) removal surgery could be identified.A longer duration of at least 70 months between implantation of inguinal mesh and revision surgery seems to give a higher chance on improvement of pain. Caregivers should not avoid surgery based on a longer duration of symptoms when an association between symptoms and the location of the mesh is found.Conclusion: With this retrospective case series, we aim to identify predictors for reduction of pain after mesh revision surgery in patients operated for inguinal hernia or pelvic organ prolapse with a polypropylene implant. Identifying these predictors may aid surgeons to counsel patients and select appropriate candidates for mesh revision surgery.Clinical records before and after mesh revision surgery from 221 patients with chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) and 59 patients with pain after pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery were collected at two experienced tertiary referral centers. Primary outcome was patient reported improvement of pain after revision surgery. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to specify predictors for pain reduction.The multivariable logistic regression was performed for each patient group separately. Patients with CPIP had higher chances of improvement of pain when time between mesh placement and mesh revision surgery was longer, with an OR of 1.19 per year. A turning point in chances of risks and benefits was demonstrated at 70 months, with improved outcomes for patients with revision surgery ≥ 70 months (OR 2.86). For POP patients, no statistically significant predictors for reduction of pain after (partial) removal surgery could be identified.A longer duration of at least 70 months between implantation of inguinal mesh and revision surgery seems to give a higher chance on improvement of pain. Caregivers should not avoid surgery based on a longer duration of symptoms when an association between symptoms and the location of the mesh is found. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]