With all of the complications related to vaginal mesh — which we reported on several years ago — the influential doctors group the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recently issued an article, “What Is New in the Use of Mesh in Vaginal Surgery?” offering data published in the past year on the topic.
One notable point about the implants, used to lift sagging pelvic organs back into place, is that removing a vaginal mesh implant that has been causing problems doesn’t always fix the problems. The article, by John R. Fischer, M.D. of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Maryland, says:
Complications from placement of permanent synthetic mesh for vaginal prolapse repair are well-documented, but there is little to guide physicians regarding outcomes after surgical removal of trans-vaginal mesh. This is a retrospective review of patients who underwent excision of trans-vaginal mesh owing to complications. The most common issues were pelvic and vaginal pain, mesh exposure, and a bulge sensation…After removal, 51% of patients reported complete resolution of their symptoms, with mesh exposure mostly likely to respond to treatment. Of those who presented with pain, 51% reported persistent pain after excision.
Fischer concludes: “…of the many symptoms that are treated with mesh excision, persistent pain may be the most difficult. Patients with a history of chronic pain may not be ideal candidates for the use of synthetic mesh.”
Dr. Peter Rosenblatt, Director of Urogynecology at Mount Auburn Hospital in Cambridge, Mass., says that use of the mesh implants has, indeed, gone down. In an email, he writes:
There has certainly been a decline in the use of transvaginal mesh to treat prolapse, although many pelvic reconstructive surgeons still offer this treatment to patients who are at high risk of failure from traditional surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse. The FDA safety update in 2011 raised concerns that some of the complications that are unique to these procedures, especially erosion (or more accurately “exposure”) of the mesh through the vaginal wall, are “not rare” and that physicians needed to counsel their patients about the potential risks of using mesh. Surgeons and their patients should weigh these risks versus the potential benefits of transvaginal mesh, which includes improved anatomic success rates. There is also no question that the ubiquitous and never-ending television ads by law firms have instilled a real sense of fear and apprehension among women who are suffering with these problems.
Meanwhile, myriad lawsuits brought by women who say they were harmed by the mesh implants, made by a Ethicon, a subsidiary of the drug giant Johnson & Johnson, continue.
Earlier this month, a California jury returned a $5.7 million verdict in favor of the plaintiff in a vaginal mesh case, according to a local TV news report.