Comparison of advantages and disadvantages of 4- and 6-arm mesh prostheses in reconstructive surgery of the urogenital prolapse in women

Abstract

The study objective is to compare the effectiveness and safety of using 4-and 6-arm mesh prostheses in transvaginal correction of urogenital prolapse. Materials and methods . From 2013 to 2018, 164female patients with grade II—IV prolapse of the pelvic muscles underwent surgery. Reconstruction of the pelvic floor using 4-arm prosthesis Prolift anterior was performed in 54 (33 %) patients (group 1), 6-arm prosthesis OPUR — in 110 (67 %) patients (group 2). The patients’ age varied between 45 and 76years (mean age 56.3 years). All women previously delivered children (69 % delivered 2 or more children). In 73 % patients, labor was complicated by raptured cervix and/or groin, episioto-my, fetal skull remaining stationary above the pelvic brim. In 25 % of women, grade IV cystocele was diagnosed at the time of examination, in 62 % — grade III, in 13 % — grade II; grade IVhysteroptosis was diagnosed in 12 % of women, grade III — in 54 %, grade II — in 34 %. Results. In the group 1, cystocele was corrected in 90 % of cases, hysteroptosis — in 75 %. Mean blood loss was 150.0 + 69.6 ml. Operative time varied between 60 and 169 min. In the group 2, cystocele was corrected in 100 % of cases, hysteroptosis — in 98 %. Mean blood loss was 125.0 + 59.6 ml. Operative time varied between 38 and 143 min. Women noted decreased emotional tension during sex. Conclusion. Disadvantages of 4-arm meshes include worse correction of hysteroptosis and significant complications, rate and grade of which lead to a decrease in manufacture of the prosthesis. Modern 6-arm mesh prosthesis OPUR is safer and more effective. Its construction and method of implantation were developed with the goal to eliminate the main disadvantages of 4-arm prostheses.