Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The multifilament polypropylene tape erosion trouble: tape structure vs surgical technique. Which one is the cause?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study was designed to clarify whether the structure of multifilament tape or the surgical technique is associated with vaginal erosions. Patients were randomized into two groups: in group 1, formed from the patients who were operated with the technique “setting the tape loosely leaving a scissor tip gap between the tape and the urethra,” and in group 2, formed from the patients who were operated with the technique “setting the tape actually touched the urethra and covering the tape by the adjacent pubocervicovaginal fascia with the aid of a suture.” After 4-year follow-up, it was found that the erosion rate was very high in group 1 (13.6%). We conclude that the high erosion rate seen in multifilament tapes is associated with the surgical technique that is used, not the structure of the multifilament tape.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Petros PE (1996) The intravaginal slingplasty operation, a minimally invasive technique for cure of urinary incontinence in the female. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 36:463–471

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ulmsten U (2001) The basic understanding and clinical results of tension-free vaginal tape for stress urinary incontinence. Urologe A 40:269–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Petros PE (2004) The female pelvic floor function, dysfunction and management according to the integral theory. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  4. Delorme E (2001) Transobturator urethral suspension: mini-invasive procedure in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women. Prog Urol 11:1306–1313

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Nilsson CG, Falconer C, Rezapour M (1995) Seven year follow up of the tension free vaginal tape procedure for treatment of urinary incontinence. Scand J Urol Nephrol 29:75–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Boubil V, Ciofu C, Traxer O, Sebe F, Haab F (2002) Complications of urethral sling procedures. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 14(5):515–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Meschia M, Pifarotti P, Bernasconi F, Magatti F, Vigano R, Bertozzi R, Barbacini P (2006) Tension free vaginal tape (TVT) and intravaginal slingplasty (IVS) for stress urinary incontinence: a multicenter randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 195(5):1338–1342

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lim YN, Muller R, Corstiaans A, Dietz HP, Barry C, Rane A (2005) Suburethral slingplasty evaluation in North Queensland, Australia: The SUSPEND trial. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 45:52–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Petros P (2007) Comment on Maher C, Schuessler B: ‘the need for randomised controlled trials in urogynaecology’. Int Urogynecol J 18:231–232

    Google Scholar 

  10. Rechberger T, Rzezniczuk K, Skorupski P, Adamiak A, Tomaszewski J, Baranowski W, Jakowicki J (2003) A randomized comparison between monofilament and multifilament tapes for stress incontinence surgery. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dyfunct 14:432–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Amid PK (1997) Classification of biomaterials and their related complications in abdominal wall hernia surgery. Hernia 1:15–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Papadimitrou JM, Petros PEP (2005) Histological studies of monofilament and multifilament polypropylene mesh implants demonstrate equivalent penetration of macrophages between fibrils. Hernia 2:75–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Papadimitrou JM, Ashman RB (1989) Macrophages: current views on their differentiation, structure and function. Ultrastruct Pathol 13:343–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Nilsson CG, Kuuva N, Falconer C, Rezapour M, Ulmsten U (2001) Long term results of the TVT procedure for surgical treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Suppl 2:S5–S8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. De Tayrac R, Kadoch J, Gervaise H, Fernandez H (2002) Chirurgie de l’incontinence urinaire d’effort par TVT: le point de vue des patients. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 31:162–166

    Google Scholar 

  16. Glavind K, Sander P (2004) Erosion, defective healing and extrusion after tension-free urethropexy for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 15:179–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Siegel AL (2006) Urethral necrosis and proximal urethro-vaginal fistula resulting from tension-free vaginal tape. Int Urogynecol J 17:661–664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Powers K, Lazarou G, Greston WM (2006) Delayed urethral erosion after tension-free vaginal tape. Int Urogynecol J 17:422–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Chen H, Ho M, Hung Y, Huang L (2007) Analysis of risk factors associated with vaginal erosion after synthetic sling procedures for stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J. DOI 10.1007/s00192-007-0400-2

  20. Karram MM, Segal JL, Vassalo BJ, Kleeman SD (2003) Complications and untoward effects of the tension-free vaginal tape procedure. Obstet Gynecol 101:929–932

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahmet Akin Sivaslioglu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sivaslioglu, A.A., Unlubilgin, E. & Dölen, I. The multifilament polypropylene tape erosion trouble: tape structure vs surgical technique. Which one is the cause?. Int Urogynecol J 19, 417–420 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-007-0456-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-007-0456-z

Keywords

Navigation