Surgical mesh and patient safety

Journal article

The use of surgical mesh for vaginal prolapse and stress urinary incontinence increased rapidly for 20 years and then fell from grace, mainly because of a failure to take patient safety seriously. The BMJ investigation by Jonathan Gornall1-3 itemises the many failings that made this rise and fall inevitable: the lack of postmarketing studies; the failure to establish device registries; the influence of financial conflicts of interest; and, in the UK, the ineffectual role of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Between them, these factors distorted the research evidence and adversely affected the care that women received, causing many of them unnecessary and irreparable harm. “Nobody involved with the mesh revolution emerges covered in glory,” says Gornall.

Authors: Heneghan, C; Godlee, F

• Publication status: Published
• Peer review status: Peer reviewed
• Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group
• Journal: BMJ
• Volume: 363
• Pages: k4231
• Publication date: 2018-10-10
• DOI: 10.1136/bmj.k4231
• EISSN: 1756-1833
• ISSN: 0959-8138
• Pmid: 30305286
• Language: English
• Keywords: Editorial