Cargando…

Use and risks of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery in women in New York state: population based cohort study

Objective To assess the use of mesh in pelvic organ prolapse surgery, and compare short term outcomes between procedures using and not using mesh. Design All inclusive, population based cohort study. Setting Statewide surgical care captured in the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chughtai, Bilal, Mao, Jialin, Buck, Jessica, Kaplan, Steven, Sedrakyan, Art
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4451585/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26037077
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h2685
_version_ 1782374160465395712
author Chughtai, Bilal
Mao, Jialin
Buck, Jessica
Kaplan, Steven
Sedrakyan, Art
author_facet Chughtai, Bilal
Mao, Jialin
Buck, Jessica
Kaplan, Steven
Sedrakyan, Art
author_sort Chughtai, Bilal
collection PubMed
description Objective To assess the use of mesh in pelvic organ prolapse surgery, and compare short term outcomes between procedures using and not using mesh. Design All inclusive, population based cohort study. Setting Statewide surgical care captured in the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System. Participants Women who underwent prolapse repair procedures in New York state from 2008 to 2011. Main outcomes measures 90 day safety events and reinterventions within one year, after propensity score matching. Categorical, time to event, and subgroup analyses (<65 and ≥65 year age groups) were conducted. Results Of 27 991 patients in total, 7338 and 20 653 underwent prolapse repair procedures with and without mesh, respectively. Mesh use increased by 44.7%, from 1461 procedures in 2008 to 2114 procedures in 2011. Most patients in the cohort were younger than 65 years (62.3% (n=17 424/27 991)). However, more patients were aged 65 years and older in the mesh group than in the non-mesh group (44.3% (n=3249) v 35.4% (n=7318)). Complications after surgery were not common, irrespective of the use or non-use of mesh. After propensity score matching, patients who received the surgery with mesh had a higher chance of having a reintervention within one year (mesh 3.3% v no mesh 2.2%, hazard ratio 1.47 (95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.79)) and were more likely to have urinary retention within 90 days (mesh 7.5% v no mesh 5.6%, risk ratio 1.33 (95% confidence interval 1.18 to 1.51)), compared with those who received surgery without mesh. In subgroup analyses based on age, mesh use was associated with an increased risk of reintervention within one year in patients under age 65 years, and increased risk of urinary retention in patients aged 65 years and over. Conclusions Despite multiple warnings released by the US Food and Drug Administration since 2008, use of mesh in pelvic organ prolapse surgery continues to grow. In this statewide comprehensive study, mesh procedures were associated with an increased risk of reinterventions within one year and urinary retention after surgery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4451585
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44515852015-06-05 Use and risks of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery in women in New York state: population based cohort study Chughtai, Bilal Mao, Jialin Buck, Jessica Kaplan, Steven Sedrakyan, Art BMJ Research Objective To assess the use of mesh in pelvic organ prolapse surgery, and compare short term outcomes between procedures using and not using mesh. Design All inclusive, population based cohort study. Setting Statewide surgical care captured in the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System. Participants Women who underwent prolapse repair procedures in New York state from 2008 to 2011. Main outcomes measures 90 day safety events and reinterventions within one year, after propensity score matching. Categorical, time to event, and subgroup analyses (<65 and ≥65 year age groups) were conducted. Results Of 27 991 patients in total, 7338 and 20 653 underwent prolapse repair procedures with and without mesh, respectively. Mesh use increased by 44.7%, from 1461 procedures in 2008 to 2114 procedures in 2011. Most patients in the cohort were younger than 65 years (62.3% (n=17 424/27 991)). However, more patients were aged 65 years and older in the mesh group than in the non-mesh group (44.3% (n=3249) v 35.4% (n=7318)). Complications after surgery were not common, irrespective of the use or non-use of mesh. After propensity score matching, patients who received the surgery with mesh had a higher chance of having a reintervention within one year (mesh 3.3% v no mesh 2.2%, hazard ratio 1.47 (95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.79)) and were more likely to have urinary retention within 90 days (mesh 7.5% v no mesh 5.6%, risk ratio 1.33 (95% confidence interval 1.18 to 1.51)), compared with those who received surgery without mesh. In subgroup analyses based on age, mesh use was associated with an increased risk of reintervention within one year in patients under age 65 years, and increased risk of urinary retention in patients aged 65 years and over. Conclusions Despite multiple warnings released by the US Food and Drug Administration since 2008, use of mesh in pelvic organ prolapse surgery continues to grow. In this statewide comprehensive study, mesh procedures were associated with an increased risk of reinterventions within one year and urinary retention after surgery. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2015-06-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4451585/ /pubmed/26037077 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h2685 Text en © Chughtai et al 2015 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Research
Chughtai, Bilal
Mao, Jialin
Buck, Jessica
Kaplan, Steven
Sedrakyan, Art
Use and risks of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery in women in New York state: population based cohort study
title Use and risks of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery in women in New York state: population based cohort study
title_full Use and risks of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery in women in New York state: population based cohort study
title_fullStr Use and risks of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery in women in New York state: population based cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Use and risks of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery in women in New York state: population based cohort study
title_short Use and risks of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery in women in New York state: population based cohort study
title_sort use and risks of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse surgery in women in new york state: population based cohort study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4451585/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26037077
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h2685
work_keys_str_mv AT chughtaibilal useandrisksofsurgicalmeshforpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryinwomeninnewyorkstatepopulationbasedcohortstudy
AT maojialin useandrisksofsurgicalmeshforpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryinwomeninnewyorkstatepopulationbasedcohortstudy
AT buckjessica useandrisksofsurgicalmeshforpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryinwomeninnewyorkstatepopulationbasedcohortstudy
AT kaplansteven useandrisksofsurgicalmeshforpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryinwomeninnewyorkstatepopulationbasedcohortstudy
AT sedrakyanart useandrisksofsurgicalmeshforpelvicorganprolapsesurgeryinwomeninnewyorkstatepopulationbasedcohortstudy