Efficacy and Safety Comparison of Robotic-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy Using Light-Weight and Heavy-Weight Polypropylene Mesh

Date

2020-05-01T05:00:00.000Z

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Abstract

AIMS: This study compares long-term surgical outcomes of light-weight polypropylene mesh (LWPPM) and heavy-weight polypropylene mesh (PPM) for robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC). METHODS: Following IRB approval, a 2-surgeon POP database of women who underwent RSC at a single institution was reviewed. Minimum follow-up time was 6 months. Patients were stratified by mesh weight: Boston Scientific MarlexTM natural Trelex mesh or AtriumTM ProLite mesh (PPM) versus Caldera Medical Vertessa(r) Lite Y Polypropylene Mesh (LWPPM). Success was defined using a composite of absence of prolapse symptoms at the patient's most recent visit, no POP-Q point beyond the hymen, and no reoperation for POP. RESULTS: From 2007 to 2018, 110 patients met study criteria: 67 with LWPPM and 43 with PPM. The success rate of RSC using LWPPM at 12 months was 91.0% versus 90.7% for RSC with PPM (p =1). Over time, the mean follow-up length was 23.3 months in the LWPPM groups compared to 44.7 months in the PPM group (p <0.0002). The success rate at the last follow-up of RSC using LWPPM was significantly higher than that of RSC with PPM - 89.6% versus 72.1% (p =0.0221). Regarding complications, mesh extrusion rates varied (3.0% for LWPPM versus 11.6% for PPM at the last follow-up); however, this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.11) nor was the difference in management (p=0.15). CONCLUSIONS: RSC using LWPPM is a safe and effective procedure. Success rates using LWPPM are not inferior to those using PPM. Complication rates were low with either mesh.

General Notes

Table of Contents

Subjects

Pelvic Organ Prolapse, Polypropylenes, Robotic Surgical Procedures, Surgical Mesh

Citation

Related URI