4.2 Article

MR scan evaluation of pelvic organ prolapse mesh complications and agreement with intra-operative findings

Journal

INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL
Volume 31, Issue 8, Pages 1559-1566

Publisher

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-019-04182-7

Keywords

MR scan; Sacrocolpopexy; Sacrohysteropexy; Mesh complications

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction An increasing number of women are presenting with symptoms after the placement of mesh implants for prolapse which may be attributable to a mesh implant complication. MRI imaging can be used to evaluate abdominally placed mesh but there is no published research evaluating the use of MRI in this group of women. The objective of our study was to report our experience as a tertiary centre in evaluating abdominal mesh with MR imaging and the agreement of MR reports with surgical findings. Study design A retrospective observational cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2) of all women referred to our tertiary unit who underwent an MR scan for investigation of symptoms of mesh complication following an abdominally placed mesh implant between June 2006 and September 2018 was performed. The reports of MR images were compared with the findings at surgery. Results MR scan was performed in 87 with suspected mesh complications. MR scan detected mesh failure in 42.1% of women (37/87), infection in 12.6% (11/87), compression in 2.3% (2/87), exposure in 12.6% (11/88), bowel extrusion in 2.3% (2/87) and inflammation in 11.5% (10/87). Agreement between MR scan report and surgical diagnosis was almost perfect for mesh failure, infection and compression, whilst agreement was only moderate for mesh erosion and signs of inflammation (failure kappa = 0.97, infection kappa = 0.94, compression kappa = 1.0, exposure kappa = 0.58 and inflammation kappa = 0.24). Conclusion These data provide information on the role of MR imaging in the investigation of women presenting with suspected intra-abdominal POP mesh complications including recurrence.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available