| October 2007 · Vol. 19, No. 10 UPDATE
HOW DEVELOPMENTS ARE CHANGING PATIENT CARE
PELVIC SURGERY
Transvaginal-trocar–delivered mesh is an attractive option for prolapse repair—but is it effective?
|
Fast Track
The overall satisfaction rate after placement of polypropylene mesh was 96.5%, and both quality of life and symptoms improved
Concurrent surgeries such as sling procedures and vaginal hysterectomy increased the risk of minor complications
The authors hypothesize that recurrent prolapse represents poor tissue quality, necessitating use of mesh in subsequent repairs
|
|
Mary
M.
South,
MDDr. South is a Fellow in the Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. Cindy
L.
Amundsen,
MDDr. Amundsen is Associate Professor and Fellowship Director, Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC.
The authors report no financial relationships relevant to this article.
The use of transvaginal mesh—with or without trocar placement—is surrounded by controversy. A number of minimally invasive vaginal mesh kits are commercially available for the repair of pelvic organ prolapse, and new kits are entering the market rapidly. The challenge is determining whether these new techniques are as effective and safe as traditional prolapse repairs.
|
