-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2016To minimise the rate of recurrent prolapse after traditional native tissue repair (anterior colporrhaphy), clinicians have utilised a variety of surgical techniques. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
To minimise the rate of recurrent prolapse after traditional native tissue repair (anterior colporrhaphy), clinicians have utilised a variety of surgical techniques.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the safety and effectiveness of surgery for anterior compartment prolapse.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE In Process (23 August 2016), handsearched journals and conference proceedings (15 February 2016) and searched trial registers (1 August 2016).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that examined surgical operations for anterior compartment prolapse.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Primary outcomes were awareness of prolapse, repeat surgery and recurrent prolapse on examination.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 33 trials (3332 women). The quality of evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Limitations were risk of bias and imprecision. We have summarised results for the main comparisons. Native tissue versus biological graft Awareness of prolapse: Evidence suggested few or no differences between groups (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52 to 1.82; five RCTs; 552 women; I = 39%; low-quality evidence), indicating that if 12% of women were aware of prolapse after biological graft, 7% to 23% would be aware after native tissue repair. Repeat surgery for prolapse: Results showed no probable differences between groups (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.97; seven RCTs; 650 women; I = 0%; moderate-quality evidence), indicating that if 4% of women required repeat surgery after biological graft, 2% to 9% would do so after native tissue repair. Recurrent anterior compartment prolapse: Native tissue repair probably increased the risk of recurrence (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.65; eight RCTs; 701 women; I = 26%; moderate-quality evidence), indicating that if 26% of women had recurrent prolapse after biological graft, 27% to 42% would have recurrence after native tissue repair. Stress urinary incontinence (SUI): Results showed no probable differences between groups (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.64; two RCTs; 218 women; I = 0%; moderate-quality evidence). Dyspareunia: Evidence suggested few or no differences between groups (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.93; two RCTs; 151 women; I = 0%; low-quality evidence). Native tissue versus polypropylene mesh Awareness of prolapse: This was probably more likely after native tissue repair (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.28; nine RCTs; 1133 women; I = 0%; moderate-quality evidence), suggesting that if 13% of women were aware of prolapse after mesh repair, 18% to 30% would be aware of prolapse after native tissue repair. Repeat surgery for prolapse: This was probably more likely after native tissue repair (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.15 to 3.58; 12 RCTs; 1629 women; I = 39%; moderate-quality evidence), suggesting that if 2% of women needed repeat surgery after mesh repair, 2% to 7% would do so after native tissue repair. Recurrent anterior compartment prolapse: This was probably more likely after native tissue repair (RR 3.01, 95% CI 2.52 to 3.60; 16 RCTs; 1976 women; I = 39%; moderate-quality evidence), suggesting that if recurrent prolapse occurred in 13% of women after mesh repair, 32% to 45% would have recurrence after native tissue repair. Repeat surgery for prolapse, stress urinary incontinence or mesh exposure (composite outcome): This was probably less likely after native tissue repair (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.83; 12 RCTs; 1527 women; I = 45%; moderate-quality evidence), suggesting that if 10% of women require repeat surgery after polypropylene mesh repair, 4% to 8% would do so after native tissue repair. De novo SUI: Evidence suggested few or no differences between groups (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.01; six RCTs; 957 women; I = 26%; low-quality evidence). No evidence suggested a difference in rates of repeat surgery for SUI. Dyspareunia (de novo): Evidence suggested few or no differences between groups (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.06; eight RCTs; n = 583; I = 0%; low-quality evidence). Native tissue versus absorbable mesh Awareness of prolapse: It is unclear whether results showed any differences between groups (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.31; one RCT; n = 54; very low-quality evidence), Repeat surgery for prolapse: It is unclear whether results showed any differences between groups (RR 2.13, 95% CI 0.42 to 10.82; one RCT; n = 66; very low-quality evidence). Recurrent anterior compartment prolapse: This is probably more likely after native tissue repair (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.06; three RCTs; n = 268; I = 0%; moderate-quality evidence), suggesting that if 27% have recurrent prolapse after mesh repair, 29% to 55% would have recurrent prolapse after native tissue repair. SUI: It is unclear whether results showed any differences between groups (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.05; one RCT; n = 49; very low-quality evidence). Dyspareunia: No data were reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Biological graft repair or absorbable mesh provides minimal advantage compared with native tissue repair.Native tissue repair was associated with increased awareness of prolapse and increased risk of repeat surgery for prolapse and recurrence of anterior compartment prolapse compared with polypropylene mesh repair. However, native tissue repair was associated with reduced risk of de novo SUI, reduced bladder injury, and reduced rates of repeat surgery for prolapse, stress urinary incontinence and mesh exposure (composite outcome).Current evidence does not support the use of mesh repair compared with native tissue repair for anterior compartment prolapse owing to increased morbidity.Many transvaginal polypropylene meshes have been voluntarily removed from the market, and newer light-weight transvaginal meshes that are available have not been assessed by RCTs. Clinicans and women should be cautious when utilising these products, as their safety and efficacy have not been established.
Topics: Cystocele; Female; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures; Humans; Pelvic Organ Prolapse; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rectal Prolapse; Secondary Prevention; Surgical Mesh; Suture Techniques; Urinary Incontinence; Uterine Prolapse
PubMed: 27901278
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004014.pub6 -
American Journal of Surgery Oct 2016Prophylactic mesh during laparotomy has been shown to be effective in preventing postoperative incisional hernia (IH) in high-risk patients. Since obesity is a risk... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Prophylactic mesh during laparotomy has been shown to be effective in preventing postoperative incisional hernia (IH) in high-risk patients. Since obesity is a risk factor for IH, we wished to determine whether mesh prevents IH in open and laparoscopic bariatric surgery patients.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis. Seven studies met inclusion criteria. We abstracted data regarding postoperative IH development, surgical site infection, and seroma or wound leakage and performed meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The prophylactic mesh group had significantly decreased odds of developing IH than the standard closure group (odds ratio, .30, 95% CI, .13 to .68, P = .004). No included studies evaluated outcomes after prophylactic mesh during laparoscopic bariatric surgery.
CONCLUSIONS
Prophylactic mesh during open bariatric surgery appears to be beneficial in reducing postoperative IH without significant increasing the odds of surgical site infection or seroma or wound leakage. Higher quality studies, including those in laparoscopic patients, and cost-utility analysis, are needed to support routine use of this intervention.
Topics: Bariatric Surgery; Humans; Incisional Hernia; Polyglactin 910; Polypropylenes; Postoperative Complications; Seroma; Surgical Mesh; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 27659158
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.06.004 -
Graft Utilization in the Augmentation of Large-to-Massive Rotator Cuff Repairs: A Systematic Review.The American Journal of Sports Medicine Nov 2016Current treatment options for symptomatic large-to-massive rotator cuff tears can reduce pain, but failure rates remain high. Surgeons have incorporated synthetic and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Current treatment options for symptomatic large-to-massive rotator cuff tears can reduce pain, but failure rates remain high. Surgeons have incorporated synthetic and biologic grafts to augment these repairs, with promising results. Multiple reviews exist that summarize these products; however, no systematic review has investigated the grafts' ability to maintain structural integrity after augmentation of large-to-massive rotator cuff repairs.
PURPOSE
To systematically review and evaluate the effectiveness of grafts in the augmentation of large-to-massive rotator cuff repairs.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of 4 reputable databases was completed. Inclusion criteria were (1) large-to-massive rotator cuff tear, (2) graft augmentation of primary repairs ± primary repair control group, and (3) minimum clinical and radiologic follow-up of 12 months. Two reviewers screened the titles, abstracts, and full articles and extracted the data from eligible studies. Results were summarized into evidence tables stratified by graft origin and level of evidence.
RESULTS
Ten studies fit the inclusion criteria. Allograft augmentation was functionally and structurally superior to primary repair controls, with intact repairs in 85% versus 40% of patients (P < .01). This was supported by observational study data. Xenograft augmentation failed to demonstrate superiority to primary repair controls, with worse structural healing rates (27% vs 60%; P =.11). Both comparative studies supported this finding. There have also been many reports of inflammatory reactions with xenograft use. Polypropylene patches are associated with improved structural (83% vs 59% and 49%; P < .01) and functional outcomes when compared with controls and xenograft augmentation; however, randomized data are lacking.
CONCLUSION
Augmentation of large-to-massive rotator cuff repairs with human dermal allografts is associated with superior functional and structural outcome when compared with conventional primary repair. Xenograft augmentation failed to demonstrate a statistically significant difference and may be associated with worse rerupture rates and occasional severe inflammatory reactions. Polypropylene patches have initial promising results. Research in this field is limited; future researchers should continue to develop prospective, randomized controlled trials to establish clear recommendations.
Topics: Humans; Rotator Cuff; Rotator Cuff Injuries; Transplants; Wound Healing
PubMed: 26847487
DOI: 10.1177/0363546515624463 -
PloS One 2015A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare porcine small intestinal submucosa (SIS) with polypropylene in open... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare porcine small intestinal submucosa (SIS) with polypropylene in open inguinal hernia repair.
METHOD
Electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were used to compare patient outcomes for the two groups via meta-analysis.
RESULT
A total of 3 randomized controlled trials encompassing 200 patients were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in recurrence (P = 0.16), hematomas (P = 0.06), postoperative pain within 30 days (P = 0.45), or postoperative pain after 1 year (P = 0.12) between the 2 groups. The incidence of discomfort was significantly lower (P = 0.0006) in the SIS group. However, the SIS group experienced a significantly higher incidence of seroma (P = 0.03).
CONCLUSIONS
Compared to polypropylene, using SIS in open inguinal hernia repair is associated with a lower incidence of discomfort and a higher incidence of seroma. However, well-designed larger RCT studies with a longer follow-up period are needed to confirm these findings.
Topics: Animals; Databases, Factual; Hematoma; Herniorrhaphy; Humans; Intestine, Small; Odds Ratio; Pain, Postoperative; Polypropylenes; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Seroma; Surgical Mesh; Swine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26252895
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0135073 -
Hernia : the Journal of Hernias and... Aug 2014Despite the vast selection of brands available, nearly all synthetic meshes for hernia surgery continue to use one or other of three basic materials: polypropylene,... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Despite the vast selection of brands available, nearly all synthetic meshes for hernia surgery continue to use one or other of three basic materials: polypropylene, polyester and ePTFE. These are used in combination with each other or with a range of additional materials such as titanium, omega 3, monocryl, PVDF and hyaluronate. This systematic review of all experimental and clinical studies is aimed at investigating whether titanized meshes confer advantages over other synthetic meshes in hernia surgery.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A search of the medical literature from 2002 to 2012, as indexed by Medline, was performed, using the PubMed search engine (http://www.pubmed.gov). The search terms were: hernia mesh, titanium coating, lightweight mesh, TiMesh, mesh complications. All papers were graded according to the Oxford hierarchy of evidence.
RESULTS
Patients operated on with the Lichtenstein technique performed using the lightweight titanium-coated mesh have a shorter convalescence than those with the heavy-weight mesh Prolene. For inguinal hernias operated on with the TAPP technique and using a lightweight titanium-coated mesh in comparison to a heavy-weight Prolene mesh, the early postoperative convalescence seems to improve. Titanized meshes do exhibit a negative effect on sperm motility 1 year after a TEP operation, but not after 3 years. The laparoscopic IPOM technique with a titanium-coated polypropylene mesh was associated with less postoperative pain in the short term, lower analgesic consumption and a quicker return to everyday activities compared with the Parietex composite mesh.
CONCLUSION
In clinical studies, the titanium-coated polypropylene mesh shows in inguinal hernia repair certain benefits compared with the use of older heavy-weight meshes.
Topics: Biocompatible Materials; Hernia, Inguinal; Herniorrhaphy; Humans; Polypropylenes; Surgical Mesh; Titanium
PubMed: 24253381
DOI: 10.1007/s10029-013-1187-3