A Mean of Three-Year Follow-Up of Transvaginal Mesh Repair Using Calistar System Devices for the Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
- (1)
- Age ≥ 18 years;
- (2)
- Stage II or greater anterior and/or apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP), as defined by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) system,
- (3)
- availability of complete preoperative and postoperative data with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up.
- (1)
- incomplete medical records,
- (2)
- loss to follow-up within 12 months after surgery.
2.1. Operative Technique: The Calistar System
2.2. Statistics
2.3. Ethical Approval
3. Results
4. Discussion
4.1. Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Surgical Outcomes
4.2. Urinary Incontinence and Symptom Relief
4.3. Comparison of Urodynamic Parameters
4.4. Clinical Implications and Future Directions
4.5. Limitations
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
POP | Pelvic Organ Prolapse |
TVM | Transvaginal Mesh |
LUTS | Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms |
POP-Q | Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification |
UDI-6 | Urinary Distress Inventory-6 |
IIQ-7 | Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-7 |
UDS | Urodynamic Study |
Qmax | Maximum Urinary Flow Rate |
RU | Residual Urine |
FS | First Sensation of Bladder Filling |
MCC | Maximum Cystometric Capacity |
Pdet | Detrusor Pressure at Maximum Flow |
MUCP | Maximum Urethral Closure Pressure |
FUL | Functional Urethral Length |
UCA | Urethral Closure Area |
DO | Detrusor Overactivity |
RIG | Retractable Insertion Guide |
TAS | Tissue Anchoring System |
BMI | Body Mass Index |
SUI | Stress Urinary Incontinence |
TVT | Tension-Free Vaginal Tape |
TOT | Transobturator Tape |
LLMS | Laparoscopic Long Mesh Surgery |
References
- Persu, C.; Chapple, C.R.; Cauni, V.; Gutue, S.; Geavlete, P. Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POP-Q)—A new era in pelvic prolapse staging. J. Med. Life 2011, 4, 75–81. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Haylen, B.T.; Maher, C.F.; Barber, M.D.; Camargo, S.; Dandolu, V.; Digesu, A.; Goldman, H.B.; Huser, M.; Milani, A.L.; Moran, P.A.; et al. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Int. Urogynecol. J. 2016, 27, 165–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Maher, C.; Feiner, B.; Baessler, K.; Schmid, C. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2016, CD004014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, T.S.; Yang, C.H.; Rom, E.; Rellora, L.E.; Jhang, L.S.; Hsieh, W.C. Anterior-apical transvaginal mesh (Calistar-S) for treatment of advanced urogenital prolapse: One-year functional and surgical outcomes. Int. Urogynecol. J. 2024, 35, 1011–1019. [Google Scholar]
- Naumann, G.; Hüsch, T.; Mörgeli, C.; Kolterer, A.; Tunn, R. Mesh-augmented transvaginal repair of recurrent or complex anterior pelvic organ prolapse in accordance with the SCENIHR opinion. Int. Urogynecol. J. 2021, 32, 819–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abhari, R.E.; Izett-Kay, M.L.; Morris, H.L.; Cartwright, R.; Snelling, S.J. Host-biomaterial interactions in mesh complications after pelvic floor reconstructive surgery. Nat. Rev. Urol. 2021, 18, 725–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deffieux, X.; Perrouin-Verbe, M.-A.; Campagne-Loiseau, S.; Donon, L.; Levesque, A.; Rigaud, J.; Stivalet, N.; Venara, A.; Thubert, T.; Vidart, A.; et al. Diagnosis and management of complications following pelvic organ prolapse surgery using a synthetic mesh: French national guidelines for clinical practice. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2024, 294, 170–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ugianskiene, A.; Davila, G.W.; Su, T.H.; FIGO Urogynecology; Pelvic Floor Committee. FIGO review of statements on use of synthetic mesh for pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet. 2019, 147, 147–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, Q.; Chen, Y.S.; Ding, J.X.; Hu, C.D.; Feng, W.W.; Hu, W.G.; Hua, K.Q. Long-term treatment outcomes of transvaginal mesh surgery versus anterior-posterior colporrhaphy for pelvic organ prolapse. Aust. N. Z. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2013, 53, 79–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- da Silveira, S.D.R.B.; Auge, A.P.F.; Jarmy-Dibella, Z.I.K.; Margarido, P.F.R.; Carramao, S.; Rodrigues, C.A.; Doumouchtsis, S.K.; Baracat, E.C.; Haddad, J.M. A multicenter, randomized trial comparing pelvic organ prolapse surgical treatment with native tissue and synthetic mesh: A 5-year follow-up study. Neurourol. Urodyn. 2020, 39, 1002–1011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, C.Y.; Hsu, C.S.; Wu, M.P.; Liu, C.M.; Chiang, P.H.; Juan, Y.S.; Tsai, E.M. Predictors of improved overactive bladder symptoms after transvaginal mesh repair for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Int. Urogynecol. J. 2011, 22, 535–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nager, C.W.; Brubaker, L.; Litman, H.J.; Zyczynski, H.M.; Varner, R.E.; Amundsen, C.; Sirls, L.T.; Norton, P.A.; Arisco, A.M.; Chai, T.C.; et al. A randomized trial of urodynamic testing before stress-incontinence surgery. N. Engl. J. Med. 2012, 366, 1987–1997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, X.; Chen, Y.; Hu, C.; Hua, K. Long-term outcomes of transvaginal mesh surgery for pelvic organ prolapse: A retrospective cohort study. BMC Women’s Health 2021, 21, 362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Utomo, E.; Korfage, I.J.; Wildhagen, M.F.; Steensma, A.B.; Bangma, C.H.; Blok, B.F. Validation of the Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI-6) and Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ-7) in a Dutch population. Neurourol. Urodyn. 2015, 34, 24–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liang, R.; Abramowitch, S.; Knight, K.; Palcsey, S.; Nolfi, A.; Feola, A.; Stein, S.; Moalli, P.A. Vaginal degeneration following implantation of synthetic mesh with increased stiffness. BJOG 2013, 120, 233–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schmid, C.; O’Rourke, P.; Maher, C. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for recurrent pelvic organ prolapse after failed transvaginal polypropylene mesh surgery. Int. Urogynecol. J. 2013, 24, 763–767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, C.Y.; Wang, C.L.; Lin, K.L.; Ker, C.R.; Loo, Z.; Liu, Y.; Wu, P.C. Laparoscopic Long Mesh Surgery with Augmented Round Ligaments: A Novel Uterine Preservation Procedure for Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 6615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barber, M.D.; Brubaker, L.; Burgio, K.L.; Richter, H.E.; Nygaard, I.; Weidner, A.C.; Menefee, S.A.; Lukacz, E.S.; Norton, P.; Schaffer, J. Comparison of 2 transvaginal surgical approaches and perioperative behavioral therapy for apical vaginal prolapse: The OPTIMAL randomized trial. JAMA 2014, 311, 1023–1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, C.Y.; Hsu, C.S.; Wu, M.P.; Liu, C.M.; Wang, T.N.; Tsai, E.M. Comparison of tension-free vaginal tape and transobturator tape procedure for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Curr. Opin. Obstet. Gynecol. 2009, 21, 342–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, C.Y.; Chen, G.D.; Rogers, R.G. Can the mini-sling become the golden standard for treating stress urinary incontinence? Int. Urogynecol. J. 2021, 32, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weber, A.M.; Walters, M.D.; Piedmonte, M.R.; Ballard, L.A. Anterior colporrhaphy: A randomized trial of three surgical techniques. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2001, 185, 1299–1304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ellerkmann, R.M.; Cundiff, G.W.; Melick, C.F.; Nihira, M.A.; Leffler, K.; Bent, A.E. Correlation of symptoms with location and severity of pelvic organ prolapse. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2001, 185, 1332–1337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brubaker, L.; Cundiff, G.W.; Fine, P.; Nygaard, I.; Richter, H.E.; Visco, A.G.; Zyczynski, H.; Brown, M.B.; Weber, A.M.; Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy with Burch colposuspension to reduce urinary stress incontinence. N. Engl. J. Med. 2006, 354, 1557–1566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wu, P.C.; Wu, C.H.; Liu, Y.; Loo, Z.; Lin, K.L.; Long, C.Y. The clinical and urodynamic outcomes of single-incision mesh surgery using the Uphold system for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 13506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aijaz, S.; Chughtai, N.; Kashif, U.; Malik, S. Long-term safety and efficacy of non-absorbable abdominal mesh for apical prolapse surgery: A 10-year experience at Tertiary Care Hospital. Pak. J. Med. Sci. 2023, 39, 567–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variable | |
Age (years) | 68.60 ± 8.21 |
Parity (n) | 3.16 ± 1.26 |
BMI (kg/m2) | 24.64 ± 3.13 |
Pad (mL) | 8.48 ± 25.27 |
Past History | |
Hormone treatment | 22 (12.22%) |
Menopause | 77 (42.78%) |
Hypertension | 72 (40%) |
Diabetes mellitus | 36 (20%) |
Hysterectomy | 72 (40%) |
Concomitant | |
Cervical amputation | 9 (5%) |
Vaginal total hysterectomy | 43 (23.89%) |
Urinary incontinence | 85 (47.22%) |
Variable | Pre-Op | Post-Op | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|
Aa | 1.01 ± 1.43 | −1.81 ± 0.85 | <0.0001 |
Ba | 2.81 ± 1.97 | −1.81 ± 0.85 | <0.0001 |
C | 0.40 ± 3.70 | −6.98 ± 2.08 | <0.0001 |
Ap | −1.77 ± 1.42 | −2.27 ± 0.76 | 0.0033 |
Bp | −0.17 ± 2.43 | −2.32 ± 0.58 | <0.0001 |
Tvl | 9.03 ± 1.29 | 8.05 ± 2.11 | 0.0005 |
UDI-6 | 27.78 ± 21.56 | 5.34 ± 10.98 | <0.0001 |
IIQ-7 | 31.09 ± 30.32 | 2.78 ± 9.60 | <0.0001 |
Symptom | Pre-Op | Post-Op | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|
Urinary frequency | 45 (57.69%) | 1 (1.28%) | <0.0001 |
Stress urinary incontinence | 24 (48%) | 11 (22%) | 0.0033 |
Urge incontinence | 41 (51.9%) | 41 (51.9%) | <0.0001 |
Incomplete bladder emptying | 25 (49.02%) | 4 (7.84%) | <0.0001 |
Urinary hesitancy | 55 (69.62%) | 4 (5.06%) | <0.0001 |
Nocturia | 61 (78.21%) | 57 (73.08%) | 0.448 |
Parameter | Pre-Op | Post-Op | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|
DO | 74 (98.67%) | 73 (97.33%) | 0.3141 |
Qmax (mL/s) | 17.19 ± 11.82 | 18.49 ± 8.47 | 0.3397 |
RU (mL) | 132.50 ± 154.39 | 54.51 ± 54.22 | 0.0003 |
FS (mL) | 171.93 ± 87.27 | 156.21 ± 86.70 | 0.1224 |
MCC (mL) | 395.37 ± 139.74 | 372.18 ± 135.28 | 0.1379 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Huang, C.-C.; Lin, K.-L.; Sung, I.-C.; Loo, Z.; Long, C.-Y. A Mean of Three-Year Follow-Up of Transvaginal Mesh Repair Using Calistar System Devices for the Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse. J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14, 4703. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14134703
Huang C-C, Lin K-L, Sung I-C, Loo Z, Long C-Y. A Mean of Three-Year Follow-Up of Transvaginal Mesh Repair Using Calistar System Devices for the Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2025; 14(13):4703. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14134703
Chicago/Turabian StyleHuang, Chao-Chi, Kun-Ling Lin, I-Chieh Sung, Zixi Loo, and Cheng-Yu Long. 2025. "A Mean of Three-Year Follow-Up of Transvaginal Mesh Repair Using Calistar System Devices for the Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse" Journal of Clinical Medicine 14, no. 13: 4703. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14134703
APA StyleHuang, C.-C., Lin, K.-L., Sung, I.-C., Loo, Z., & Long, C.-Y. (2025). A Mean of Three-Year Follow-Up of Transvaginal Mesh Repair Using Calistar System Devices for the Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 14(13), 4703. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14134703