Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

BACKGROUND: There has been increasing concern and scrutiny in the use of mesh for certain pelvic organ prolapse procedures. However, mesh erosion was often associated with sites of suture fixation of the mesh to the rectum or vagina. Thus, in response to this finding, we replaced our suture material with absorbable monofilament suture. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the rates of mesh-related complications after laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy, according to the type of suture used in fixation of mesh. DESIGN: This was retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: This study was performed at a high-volume, tertiary care center. It was conducted using a prospective database including patients who underwent laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy over a 7-year period. PATIENTS: A total of 495 cases were included; 296 (60%) laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexies were performed using a nonabsorbable suture compared with 199 (40%) with an absorbable suture in a case-matched analysis. In addition, 151 cases of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy with nonabsorbable were matched based on age, sex, and time of follow-up, with an equal number of patients using absorbable monofilament suture. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Primary outcome was symptomatic mesh erosion after rectopexy. Secondary outcomes included other mesh-related complications and/or reoperations. RESULTS: The erosion rate was 2% (6/495) in the nonabsorbable suture group, including 4 erosions into the rectum and 2 into the vagina. There was no erosion in the group with absorbable suture. This difference was maintained after matching: after a median follow-up of 6 (12) months, there was no erosion in the absorbable suture group versus 3.3% erosion (n = 5) in the nonabsorbable suture group (p = 0.03). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective design. CONCLUSIONS: Mesh-related complications are reduced using absorbable sutures compared with nonabsorbable sutures when performing laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy with synthetic mesh without an increase in rectopexy failures. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B49.

Original publication

DOI

10.1097/DCR.0000000000001510

Type

Journal article

Journal

Dis Colon Rectum

Publication Date

26/09/2019