Transvaginal mesh repair for pelvic organ prolapse

AimWe compared outcomes for traditional vaginal surgery with uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS) versus transvaginal mesh repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). MethodsWe performed a retrospective chart review of pelvic organ prolapse cases that occurred between February 2007 and December 2011. Success rates for traditional vaginal repair plus USLS and transvaginal mesh repair were determined. ResultsAs compared with traditional surgery (n=81), using mesh (n=90) for stage III or IV prolapse resulted in higher rates of successful treatment. However, mesh repair also resulted in increased intraoperative blood loss and postoperative adverse events, such as pain and dyspareunia. ConclusionTraditional vaginal repair plus USLS was an improvement on traditional surgery, resulting in a higher anatomical success rate. On the other hand, both intraoperative and postoperative complications in mesh repair could be reduced by protective factors such as the surgeon's experience.