Premium
Techniques of transvaginal mesh prolapse surgery in Japan, and the comparison of complication rates by surgeons’ specialty and experience
Author(s) -
Kato Kumiko,
Gotoh Momokazu,
Takahashi Satoru,
Kusanishi Hiroshi,
Takeyama Masami,
Koyama Masayasu
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
international journal of urology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.172
H-Index - 67
eISSN - 1442-2042
pISSN - 0919-8172
DOI - 10.1111/iju.14343
Subject(s) - medicine , surgery , specialty , bladder injury , complication , general surgery , hysterectomy , pathology
Objectives To investigate techniques of transvaginal mesh prolapse surgery in Japan, and compare complication rates by surgeons’ specialty and experience with transvaginal mesh prolapse surgery. Methods We carried out an anonymous questionnaire survey for surgeons attending a national transvaginal mesh prolapse surgery meeting in 2010. The surgeons were asked to state their specialty, practice patterns, transvaginal mesh prolapse surgery techniques and the number of transvaginal mesh prolapse procedures carried out as an operator including the complications that occurred. Results A total of 118 surgeons (59% of the attendees) responded to the questionnaire. The mean age was 44.0 ± 9.1 years, 54 (46%) were gynecologists and 64 (54%) were urologists. All urologists and 78% of gynecologists carried out anti‐incontinence surgery (midurethral sling), whereas more gynecologists (93%) carried out native tissue repair than urologists (73%). Most of both specialties (each 98%) avoided prophylactic anti‐incontinence surgery during prolapse surgery. Concomitant hysterectomy during transvaginal mesh prolapse surgery was generally avoided. Surgeons reached a consensus regarding the critical transvaginal mesh prolapse surgery techniques: hydrodissection (98%) and the full‐thickness dissection (the “Lychee layer”; 69%). A total of 11 935 Prolift‐type transvaginal mesh prolapse procedures were carried out and the following complications were reported: bladder injury (1.6%), rectal injury (0.3%), ureteral injury (0.1%), blood transfusion (0.2%), vaginal exposure (2.8%) and recurrence requiring reoperation (1.1%). Although complications did not differ between specialty, bladder injury, transfusion and vaginal exposure were less prevalent with experienced surgeons (≥50 transvaginal mesh prolapse surgery cases). Conclusions Over 10 000 transvaginal mesh prolapse surgery had been carried out in Japan with a relatively low complication rate until 2010. This survey shows that surgeons’ experience could lead to a decrease in the amount of transvaginal mesh prolapse surgery complications.