Journal article
Complications Reported to the Food and Drug Administration: A Cross-sectional Comparison of Urogynecologic Meshes
Urogynecology, v 28(7), pp 452-460
01 Jul 2022
PMID: 35536679
Featured in Collection : UN Sustainable Development Goals @ Drexel
Abstract
Importance The U.S. Food and Drug Administration uses the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database to evaluate the safety of urogynecologic meshes; however, reports on individual meshes have not been characterized. Objective The aim of the study was to compare complications among available urogynecologic meshes reported to the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database. Study Design This study is a cross-sectional analysis of medical device reports (MDRs) of urogynecologic mesh from January 2004 to March 2019, using the Reed Tech Navigator (LexisNexis), which codes MDRs. The percentage of reports containing specific complaints (not an adverse event rate) were compared with chi(2) tests with Dunn-Sidak correction. Correlations with time on market, mesh weight, stiffness, and porosity were determined. Results The 34,485 reports examined included 6 transvaginal meshes, 4 sacrocolpopexy meshes, and 10 midurethral slings. Most reported events were pain, erosion, and infection. For transvaginal prolapse, less than 10% of Uphold Lite (Boston Scientific) reports contained pain or erosion versus greater than 90% of Prolift/Prolift+M (Ethicon, P < 0.001). For sacrocolpopexy mesh, greater than 90% of Gynemesh (Ethicon; Prolift in vaginal form) reports included erosion and pain versus less than 60% for Artisyn (Ethicon), Restorelle (Colpoplast), and Upsylon (Boston Scientific, P < 0.0001). For slings, Gynecare TVT Obturator had the highest proportion of erosion and pain complaints. Heavier sling meshes had more reports. When Ascend (Caldera Medical), an outlier with only 5 reports, was excluded, transvaginal mesh stiffness correlated strongly with number of reports. For transvaginal meshes, number of reports correlated with time on market (rho = 0.8, P = 0.04). Conclusions Individual meshes have different properties with different complication profiles, which should inform mesh development and use. Gynemesh MDRs included pain and erosion more frequently than others. Comprehensive registries are needed.
Metrics
7 Record Views
Details
- Title
- Complications Reported to the Food and Drug Administration: A Cross-sectional Comparison of Urogynecologic Meshes
- Creators
- Amanda M. Artsen - National Institutes of HealthJessica C. Sassani - National Institutes of HealthPamela A. Moalli - National Institutes of HealthMegan S. Bradley - National Institutes of Health
- Publication Details
- Urogynecology, v 28(7), pp 452-460
- Publisher
- Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
- Number of pages
- 9
- Grant note
- NIH K12HD043441 / National Institutes of Health/Office of Research onWomen's Health Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers inWomen's Health
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Language
- English
- Academic Unit
- Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Web of Science ID
- WOS:000834834100010
- Scopus ID
- 2-s2.0-85133144446
- Other Identifier
- 991022135715104721
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:
InCites Highlights
Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:
- Web of Science research areas
- Obstetrics & Gynecology