There are many risks involved with re-operation after pelvic floor reconstruction.  Older methods used to treat organ prolapsed repair were associated with high rates of failure, hence newer, more safe methods such as the use of synthetic materials are being used to augment pelvic organ prolapse repair.  In a report titled “Review of  Synthetic Mesh-Related Complications in Pelvic Floor Reconstructive Surgery” written by the  Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Derby City General Hospital, Author Abdulmalik Bako claims “The use of synthetic mesh to correct apical, anterior and posterior vaginal wall prolapse is not without complications. This review aims to evaluate the long-term complications of synthetic mesh in pelvic reconstructive surgery.  Some studies suggest that about 50 percent of parous women have some degree of pelvic organ prolapse.  Ten percent of these cases being symptomatic.  Women around the age of 80 have an 11-12 percent risk of surgery for prolapse.  There are several surgical procedures that have been created to correct pelvic organ prolapse (POP).  All of these surgeries are associated with their own high levels of failure, despite increasing knowledge of pelvic anatomy and improvements in surgical techniques.

Author Abdulmalik Bako continues with “A re-operation rate of nearly 30% has been reported [2, 5]. Some studies quote a recurrence risk as high as 33–45% [6, 7].  Traditional surgical procedures can take a long time to perform, result in long hospital stay, long time to recover and return to daily activities [8] resulting in higher cost to the health service and the society. The need to improve the outcome of traditional surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse has led to increased use of graft materials in pelvic reconstructive surgery. The aim of using mesh in pelvic reconstructive surgery is to result in repairs that are safe, effective and durable. Whilst on the one hand, sub-urethral sling procedures using synthetic meshes are now the gold standard for the surgical management of stress urinary incontinence with a success rate of around 81% at 7-year follow-up [9].”

There is still insufficient data to make any definitive conclusions with regard to effectiveness of biological or synthetic materials in primary or recurrent prolapse surgery.  Abdulmalik Bako further states, “The objective of using mesh in pelvic reconstructive surgery includes: substitution or replacement of lacking supportive tissue, reinforcement of weak or defective supportive tissues or induction of new supportive tissue and consolidation to complement traditional surgical techniques[3]. It is important to note that the use of synthetic mesh is not without complications and mesh-related complications could have significant impact on the quality of life of sufferers.”

Articles such as this can be used as evidence in a transvaginal mesh lawsuit to demonstrate that TVM manufacturers knew or should have known the risks associated with the use of their products, and because many of these companies have time and again failed to make this information public, a number of transvaginal mesh lawsuits have been filed around the world.

If you or a loved one used a vaginal mesh product and experienced a vaginal mesh complication, please do not hesitate to contact our team contact our team of transvaginal mesh lawyers at the information provided below.

(855) 452-5529

Our Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit Information page is a great place to start if you have any questions about Transvaginal Mesh.