Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38418758›Full record

ArticleScience China. Life sciences2024

Efficacy and safety of transvaginal mesh repair in a cohort with a minimum of 10-year follow-up.

Zhibo Zhang, Jianbin Guo, Weijie Tian, Ye Zhang, Yuelun Zhang, Tianshu Sun, Jiali Duan, Xinmiao Bao, Yuan Wang, Yang Ye and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Science China. Life sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Zhibo Zhang *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, 100730, China.
Jianbin Guo *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, 100730, China.
Weijie TianDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, 100730, China.
Ye ZhangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, 100730, China.
Yuelun ZhangMedical Research Center, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100730, China.
Tianshu SunMedical Research Center, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100730, China.
Jiali DuanMedical Doctor Program, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100730, China.
Xinmiao BaoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, 100730, China.
Yuan WangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, 100730, China.
Yang YeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, 100730, China.
Qianqian GaoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, 100730, China.
Honghui ShiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, 100730, China.
Abraham Nick MorseTufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, 02111, USA.
Juan ChenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, 100730, China. pumchcj@sina.com.
Lan ZhuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, 100730, China. zhu_julie@vip.sina.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although transvaginal mesh (TVM) repair is no longer used in some countries, long-term outcomes after TVM surgery are of great importance globally. However, reports with follow-up >10 years are limited. Thus, this study aimed to report outcomes in a prospective cohort with at least 10 years of follow-up. Women with stage III-IV symptomatic prolapse were approached consecutively from 2008 to 2013 at one tertiary hospital. The main outcome measure was symptomatic failure. Secondary outcomes included anatomic failure, recurrence, patient satisfaction, complications, and reoperation. The Kaplan-Meier curve was used to estimate the cumulative failure rate. Of the 121 patients enrolled in the study, 103 (85.1%) completed a median follow-up of 11 years. The estimated probability rates of symptomatic and anatomic failure were 17.6% and 8.8% in 11 years, respectively. The estimated incidence of symptomatic failure increased by 8.2% between 5 and 11 years; however, the corresponding rate for anatomic failure was 3.7%. The most common complication was vaginal mesh exposure, and its estimated probability increased from 19.3% to 28.4% from 5 to 11 years, respectively. Office trimming resolved 80.0% of vaginal exposures. These patients did not report decreased overall satisfaction. Patients with vaginal mesh exposure requiring>3 office procedures or mesh removal in the operating room (5.8% by 11 years) had lower satisfaction rates (P<0.01) and were defined as having severe mesh exposure. The rates of postoperative pain, reoperation, and Patient Global Impression of Improvement ⩾2 were 2.5%, 3.3%, and 94.2%, respectively. The results of this study implied that TVM treatment gradually increased the symptomatic failure rate but provided durable anatomical support of the vaginal wall. Vaginal mesh exposure was common in women who were largely not sexually active; however, 80% of the cases could be managed in the outpatient clinic, which did not affect patient satisfaction.

Indexed as

Pelvic Organ ProlapseReoperationSurgical MeshAgedCohort StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionPostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesRecurrenceTreatment OutcomeVaginacomplicationefficacylong-term follow-uppelvic organ prolapsesafetytransvaginal mesh

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.