INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Our aim was to compare anatomical and functional outcome between vaginal colposuspension and transvaginal mesh.
METHODS: This was a prospective randomized controlled trial in a teaching hospital. Sixty-eight women with stage ≥3 anterior vaginal wall prolapse according to the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) system were assessed, randomized, and analyzed. Patients were randomized to anterior colporrhaphy with vaginal colposuspension (n = 35) or transvaginal mesh (n = 33). Primary outcome was objective cure rate of the anterior vaginal wall, defined as POP-Q ≤ 1 at 2 years. Secondary outcomes were functional results, quality-of-life (QoL) scores, mesh-related morbidity, and onset of urinary incontinence.
RESULTS: The anatomical result for point Ba was significantly better at 2 years in the mesh group (-2.8 cm) than in the colposuspension group (-2.4 cm) (p = 0.02). Concerning POP-Q stages, the anatomical success rate at 2 years was 84.4 % for colposuspension and 100 % for mesh (p = 0.05). There were 5 anatomic recurrences (15.6 %) in the colposuspension group. The erosion rate was 6 % (n = 2). No significant difference was noted regarding minor complications. Analysis of QoL questionnaires showed overall improvement in both groups, with no significant difference between them.
CONCLUSIONS: The vaginal colposuspension technique of anterior vaginal wall prolapse repair gave good anatomical and functional results at 2 years. Transobturator vaginal mesh gave better 2-year anatomical results than vaginal colposuspension, with overall improvement in QoL in both groups.
Written by:
Lamblin G, Van-Nieuwenhuyse A, Chabert P, Lebail-Carval K, Moret S, Mellier G. Are you the author?
Department of Obstetrics and Urogynecology, Femme Mère Enfant University Hospital, 59 Boulevard Pinel, 69677, Bron, France.
Reference: Int Urogynecol J. 2014 Feb 27. Epub ahead of print.
doi: 10.1007/s00192-014-2344-7
PubMed Abstract
PMID: 24573358
UroToday.com Trauma & Reconstruction Section
