PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - McFadden, Emily
AU  - Lay-Flurrie, Sarah
AU  - Koshiaris, Constantinos
AU  - Richards, Georgia C
AU  - Heneghan, Carl
TI  - The long-term impact of vaginal surgical mesh devices in UK primary care: a cohort study in the CPRD
AID  - 10.1101/2021.07.27.21261171
DP  - 2021 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2021.07.27.21261171
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/07/29/2021.07.27.21261171.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/07/29/2021.07.27.21261171.full
AB  - Objective Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) are treated with surgical mesh devices; evidence of their long-term complications is lacking. To examine long-term complications in women with SUI and/or POP, with and without surgical mesh implants.Design Longitudinal open cohort study from April 01 2006 to November 30 2018Setting The Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Gold database, linked to Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES) inpatient data, Office for National Statistics mortality data, and Index of Multiple Deprivation socioeconomic status data.Participants Women aged ≥18 years with a diagnostic SUI/POP code.Exposure Mesh surgery coded in HES or CPRD data, compared to no mesh surgery.Main Outcomes measures Rates of diagnoses of depression, anxiety or self-harm (composite measure) and sexual dysfunction, using Cox proportional hazards regression, and rates of prescriptions for antibiotics and opioids, using negative binomial regression.Results There were 220,544 women eligible for inclusion; 74% (n=162,687) had SUI, 37% (n=82,123) had POP and 11% (n=24,266) had both. Women undergoing mesh surgery for SUI or POP had higher rates of antibiotic use (SUI: IRR 1.15 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.18; p<0.001); POP: IRR 1.09 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.14; p<0.001)). Women with no previous history of the outcome, who underwent mesh surgery for SUI or POP, had higher rates of depression, anxiety, or self-harm (SUI: HR 2.43 (95% CI 2.19 to 2.70; p<0.001; POP: HR 1.47 (95% CI 1.19 to 1.81; p<0.001)), sexual dysfunction (SUI: HR 1.88 (1.50 to 2.36; p<0.001); POP: HR 1.64 (95% CI 1.02 to 2.63; p=0.04)) and opioid use (SUI: IRR 1.40 (95% CI 1.26 to 1.56, p<0.001); POP: IRR 1.23 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.49; p=0.04)). Women with a history of depression, anxiety and self-harm had lower rates of these outcomes with SUI or POP mesh surgery (SUI: HR 0.70 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.73; p<0.001), POP: HR 0.72 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.79; p<0.001). Women with a history of opioid use who had POP mesh surgery had lower rates of prescriptions (IRR 0.91 95% CI (0.86 to 0.96); p=0.001).Conclusions Mesh surgery was associated with poor mental and sexual health outcomes, alongside increased opioid and antibiotic use, in women with no history of these outcomes and improved mental health, and lower opioid use, in women with a previous history of these outcomes. Careful consideration of the benefits and risk of mesh surgery for women with SUI or POP on an individual basis is required.What is known on this topic There are well publicised concerns about high complication rates and harms associated with surgical mesh, a treatment that has been used in urogynaecological procedures to treat stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) for the past 20 years. Yet, there is a consistent lack of long-term evidence over the use of surgical mesh beyond surgical readmission, with NICE, Cochrane, and the FDA all reporting a lack of long-term outcome data. This study reports long-term complications in women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and/or pelvic organ prolapse (POP), with and without surgical mesh implants.What this study adds In this cohort of 162,687 women with SUI and 82,123 women with POP, rates of depression, anxiety, self-harm, sexual dysfunction and opioid prescriptions were higher in women with mesh-surgery who had a previous history of these outcomes. Lower rates of depression, anxiety and self-harm were seen in women with a history of these outcomes and SUI or POP mesh surgery. Opioid prescribing were lower in women with a previous history of prescriptions and POP mesh surgery. Careful consideration of the benefits and risk of mesh surgery for women with SUI or POP on an individual basis is required.Competing Interest StatementEM has no conflicts of interest. SLF was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre (Oxford) and NIHR Applied Research Collaboration Oxford and Thames Valley during the conduct of the study, but outside the submitted work. CK is currently supported by a Wellcome Trust/Royal Society Sir Henry Dale Fellowship, but outside the submitted work. GCR was financially supported by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research (SPCR), the Naji Foundation, and the Rotary Foundation to study for a Doctor of Philosophy, but no longer has any conflicts of interest. CH holds grant funding from the NIHR School of Primary Care Research Evidence Synthesis Working Group [Project 390], the NIHR BRC Oxford and the World Health Organization for a series of Living rapid review on the modes of transmission of SARs-CoV-2. CH has received financial remuneration from an asbestos case and given legal advice on mesh and hormone pregnancy tests cases. He has received expenses and fees for his media work including occasional payments from BBC Radio 4 Inside Health and The Spectator. He receives expenses for teaching EBM and is also paid for his GP work in NHS out of hours (contract Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust). He has also received income from the publication of a series of toolkit books and for appraising treatment recommendations in non NHS settings. He is Director of CEBM and an NIHR Senior Investigator and an advisor to Collateral Global.Funding StatementThis work was funded by the NIHR School for Primary Care Research [project no. 438, round FR17].Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The protocol for this research was approved by the Independent Scientific Advisory Committee (ISAC) of the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (protocol number 19_167), and the approved protocol is available on request. Ethical approval for observational research using the CPRD with approval from ISAC has been granted by a National Research Ethics Service Committee (Trent Multi Research Ethics Committee, REC reference number 05/MRE04/87).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData sharing: To guarantee the confidentiality of personal and health information only the authors have had access to the data during the study in accordance with the relevant licence agreements. CPRD linked data were provided under a licence that does not permit sharing.