Precision in Practice: The Critical Role of Mesh and Procedure Type Specification in Urogynecological Surgeries and Research

Reut Rotem, Daniel Galvin*, Yair Daykan, Sumaiya Al-shukaili, Barry A. O’Reilly, Orfhlaith E. O’Sullivan

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Recently, the debate surrounding the use of mesh in urogynecological procedures has intensified, leading to FDA warnings and heightened safety concerns. This clinical opinion emphasizes the vital need to specify mesh types in these procedures, drawing attention to the risk profiles and clinical outcomes associated with various meshes and the procedures that utilize them. A significant issue identified in contemporary literature is the tendency to group diverse mesh types under the same umbrella, disregarding their unique characteristics and applications. We describe the range of mesh types, their application routes, and associated complications, highlighting the risks of this nonspecific approach to patient safety and informed decision making. We critically examine the generalization of mesh terminology in clinical and research dialogues. Concluding with specific recommendations for health care providers and researchers, the paper advocates for a more nuanced understanding and communication in the field, ultimately aiming to improve patient care and safety in urogynecological practice.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1763-1767
Number of pages5
JournalInternational Urogynecology Journal
Volume35
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2024

Keywords

  • FDA warnings
  • Mesh
  • Mesh type specification
  • Midurethral sling
  • Safety
  • Urogynecology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Precision in Practice: The Critical Role of Mesh and Procedure Type Specification in Urogynecological Surgeries and Research'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this