Search

Objective: To compare the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic sacropexy (LS) and transvaginal mesh (TVM) at 4 years. Design: Extended follow up of a randomised trial. Setting: Eleven centres. Population: Women with cystocele stage ≥2 (pelvic organ prolapse quantification [POP‐Q], aged 45–75 years without previous prolapse surgery. Methods: Synthetic non‐absorbable mesh placed in the vesicovaginal space and sutured to the promontory (LS) or maintained by arms through pelvic ligaments and/or muscles (TVM). Main outcome measures: Functional outcomes (pelvic floor distress inventory [PFDI‐20] as primary outcome); anatomical assessment (POP‐Q), composite outcome of success; re‐interventions for complications. Results: A total of 220 out of 262 randomised patients have been followed at 4 years. PFDI‐20 significantly improved in both groups and was better (but below the minimal clinically important difference) after LS (mean difference −7.2 points; 95% CI −14.0 to −0.05; P = 0.029). The improvement in quality of life and the success rate (LS 70%, 61–81% versus TVM 71%, 62–81%; hazard ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.55–1.54; P = 0.75) were similar. POP‐Q measurements did not differ, except for point C (LS −57 mm versus TVM −48 mm, P = 0.0093). The grade III or higher complication rate was lower after LS (2%, 0–4.7%) than after TVM (8.7%, 3.4–13.7%; hazard ratio 4.6, 95% CI 1.007–21.0, P = 0.049)). Conclusions: Both techniques provided improvement and similar success rates. LS had a better benefit–harm balance with fewer re‐interventions due to complications. TVM remains an option when LS is not feasible. At 4 years, Laparoscopic Sacropexy (LS) had a better benefit–harm balance with fewer re‐interventions due to complications than Trans‐Vaginal Mesh (TVM). At 4 years LS had a better benefit–harm balance with fewer re‐interventions due to complications than TVM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Many surgical procedures for the repair of pelvic organ prolapse are used nowadays. Reconstructive pelvic surgery continues to evolve while surgeons continue to search the definitive surgical cure and have to choose the most appropriate procedures for their patients. Concerning the vaginal approach procedures, there is an increasing interest in the use of synthetic meshes which are at present widely used for surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse. Prosthetic repair seems to be more reliable, especially when native tissues are of poor quality. The use of synthetic meshes may also simplify surgical procedures and reduce operative duration and morbidity. Material must be inert, permanent and resistant to infection. Based on authors'' and other researchers'' published experimental and clinical experience, polypropylene is assumed to be the most appropriate material for the vaginal repair of pelvic organ prolapse. However, since no standardized outcome measure is available, it is difficult to compare the results of surgical procedures. Only in recent studies, the subjective cure rates (patient satisfaction and outcome) have been assessed as well as the objective cure rates determined by the investigators. The subjective cure rate is probably more influenced by the functional outcome and sexual activity than by the anatomical result. Continuous evaluation is necessary to study replacement synthetic materials which should improve the rate of prolapse recurrence and reduce the risk of complications. Randomized controlled trials are required to determine which surgical procedures and type of prosthesis are most suitable. This review evaluates the properties of prosthetic materials, their complications and the most common procedures involved in the use of meshes for pelvic reconstructive surgery. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]