Inadequate regulation for vaginal mesh products has exposed women to unnecessary harms, warn experts

December 7, 2017, British Medical Journal

Inadequate regulatory processes for vaginal mesh products used to treat stress incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse have exposed women to unnecessary harms, warn experts in The BMJ today.

Professor Carl Heneghan at Oxford University's Centre for Evidence Based Medicine and colleagues argue that regulatory failings have enabled new devices to be brought to market with inadequate evidence - and more than 100,000 women around the world are now suing manufacturers after developing serious complications.

What went wrong, they ask?

In the US, transvaginal meshes were initially class II devices (lower risk), allowing them to be marketed on the basis of equivalence to existing devices despite important changes, they explain.

So Professor Heneghan and his team traced marketing clearance for 61 mesh devices back through a chain of equivalence claims to only two unique originating devices approved in 1985 and 1996.

Their results, published in BMJ Open, show no evidence of any new clinical trial data at the time of device approval for all of these 61 devices, with empirical evidence of effectiveness from randomised trials emerging on average five years after approval (range 1 to 14 years).

They argue that changes in design "should have alerted regulators to important differences in the technological characteristics of the mesh that should have negated the use of equivalence."

They also show that evidence consistently pointed to a lack of long term data to inform use of vaginal mesh devices. And when longer term evidence did emerge, it identified serious concerns.

In recognition of the growing problems, many countries have already reclassified mesh as high risk, and NICE is recommending transvaginal mesh should not be used to treat vaginal prolapse because of safety concerns.

And new EU regulations, published in May 2017, mean that clinical investigations for class III and will be required to provide evidence of safety and performance, explain the authors.

However, they point out that there is a three year transition period before these rules fully come into force, in May 2020. "We think these changes are insufficient, and the long delay in implementation does not represent a timely response to patients' needs," they write.

In the case of vaginal mesh devices, they argue that evidence from large pragmatic trials did not emerge until 20 years after the first products were introduced and 12 years after the call for longer term studies. "In our view, to be considered safe and approved for widespread use, long term implantable devices should have been evaluated in studies with follow-up of at least five years."

They suggest that limited access could be provided through temporary licences that restrict use to within clinical trials with long follow-up. "This would ensure that safety and effectiveness data were available before full marketing authorisation," they say.

They also recommend that a patient registry should be established for all implantable devices to enable long term follow-up and surveillance. "Such registries should include unique identification so that any shortcomings can be more readily tracked, patterns of use monitored, and patients later judged to be at risk more easily identified." they conclude.

Explore further: Pelvic Floor Society statement—use of mesh surgeries for constipation and rectal prolapse

More information: Carl J Heneghan et al. Trials of transvaginal mesh devices for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic database review of the US FDA approval process, BMJ Open (2017). DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017125

Related Stories

Pelvic Floor Society statement—use of mesh surgeries for constipation and rectal prolapse

September 21, 2017
In light of ongoing concerns by the media and the public surrounding the use of mesh in women with pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence, the Pelvic Floor Society has issued a consensus statement addressing the use ...

FDA sets new rules for injury-prone pelvic mesh

January 4, 2016
Mesh implants used to repair pelvic collapse in women will face new federal scrutiny, under rules responding to thousands of injuries reported with the problem-prone devices.

Kentucky AG sues Johnson & Johnson over vaginal implants

August 16, 2016
The Kentucky Attorney General announced Tuesday that he's seeking thousands of dollars in damages for each patient in the state who got a vaginal mesh implant made by Johnson and Johnson and its medical device unit, accusing ...

Failing medical implants are causing hundreds of thousands of people misery

September 20, 2017
Thousands of women across the world have been left in terrible pain after being implanted with transvaginal mesh – a device to treat urinary incontinence or prolapse. How did a medical implant that has caused so much damage ...

New evidence gives women informed choice in the prolapse surgery debate

February 9, 2016
New evidence published today highlights benefits and harms of using artificial mesh when compared with tissue repair in the surgical treatment of vaginal prolapse. Slightly better repair with mesh needs to be weighed carefully ...

Mesh doesn't up cure rate for vaginal prolapse repair

September 12, 2013
(HealthDay)—There are no differences in cure rates after three years of follow-up between women receiving mesh or no mesh for vaginal prolapse repair, according to a study published online Sept. 6 in Obstetrics & Gynecology.

Recommended for you

Sweet, bitter, fat: New study reveals impact of genetics on how kids snack

February 22, 2018
Whether your child asks for crackers, cookies or veggies to snack on could be linked to genetics, according to new findings from the Guelph Family Health Study at the University of Guelph.

The good and bad health news about your exercise posts on social media

February 22, 2018
We all have that Facebook friend—or 10—who regularly posts photos of his or her fitness pursuits: on the elliptical at the gym, hiking through the wilderness, crossing a 10K finish line.

Smartphones are bad for some teens, not all

February 21, 2018
Is the next generation better or worse off because of smartphones? The answer is complex and research shows it largely depends on their lives offline.

Tackling health problems in the young is crucial for their children's future

February 21, 2018
A child's growth and development is affected by the health and lifestyles of their parents before pregnancy - even going back to adolescence - according to a new study by researchers at the Murdoch Children's Research Institute, ...

Lead and other toxic metals found in e-cigarette 'vapors': study

February 21, 2018
Significant amounts of toxic metals, including lead, leak from some e-cigarette heating coils and are present in the aerosols inhaled by users, according to a study from scientists at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public ...

Why teens need up to 10 hours' sleep

February 21, 2018
Technology, other distractions and staying up late make is difficult, but researchers say teenagers need to make time for 8-10 hours of sleep a night to optimise their performance and maintain good health and wellbeing.

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.