Trans‐Vaginal Mesh Revision: A Comprehensive Review on Etiologies and Management Strategies with Emphasis on Postoperative Pain Outcomes

The use of polypropylene mesh to augment surgery aimed to correct pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence stems largely from the high recurrence rates of native tissue repairs. While objective outcomes were improved, mesh related complications began to emerge that included mesh exposures, extrusions, dyspareunia and other pain issues. However, the indication for and benefit of surgical intervention(s) to address these complications are lacking. We aim to review to current literature regarding postoperative pain outcomes following vaginal mesh revision. Evidence based literature indicates that mesh complications are not rare and surgery that aims to address them generally have an overall benefit. However, studies available are generally small case series of a retrospective nature with short follow up. Some themes are evident: there is a long lag period from mesh insertion to removal; there is a lack of a true denominator of total mesh insertions making it hard to gauge the real scope of the problem; mesh material found not along the expected trocar path or coursing close to neurovascular structures thus raises the possibility of technical errors during insertion. Transvaginal mesh revision(s) for mesh complications generally have a positive effect on pain outcomes, but better controlled studies are needed. Additionally, since technical issues may be a factor in the development of mesh complications, rigorous training and sufficient surgical case volume should be emphasized.