International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 24, Issue 1, pp 81–89

Transischioanal trans-sacrospinous ligament rectocele repair with polypropylene mesh: a prospective study with assessment of rectoanal function

  • Pascal Mourtialon
  • Vincent Letouzey
  • Georges Eglin
  • Renaud de Tayrac
  • French Ugytex Study Group
Original Article


Introduction and hypothesis

Despite good anatomical outcomes of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair by the vaginal route using synthetic mesh, complications limit their use. Clinical data are needed to generalize prolapse mesh repair by the vaginal route. The current study aims to evaluate midterm rectoanal function and clinical outcomes after transischioanal rectocele repair using a medium weight polypropylene mesh.


Between March 2003 and June 2004, 230 patients with stage II–IV anterior and/or posterior POP were included in a prospective multicenter study. The current study is based on the analysis of the 116 patients who underwent a rectocele repair via the infracoccygeal route through the sacrospinous ligament. Anatomical cure was defined when rectocele was at stage <II in the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) system. Postoperative functional results were evaluated using the self-administered Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI) and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ).


Of the 116 patients who received a posterior mesh with two arms via the infracoccygeal route through the sacrospinous ligament, midterm anatomical results were available for 78 women representing 67 % (78/116) of the operated patients. The mean follow-up was 36 (± 8.1) months. No rectal injury occurred during surgery. The objective success rate was 94.8 % and subjective (by patient satisfaction) was 93.23 %. Colorectal-Anal Impact (CRAI) and Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory (CRADI) scores were both significantly decreased at midterm follow-up in comparison with baseline (42.7 at baseline vs 11.4 at 24- or 36-month follow-up, p = 0.001 for CRAI, and 81.1 vs 34.4, p < 0.001 for CRADI) highlighting the benefits of rectocele repair on colorectal-anal function.


Polypropylene mesh with two arms via the infracoccygeal route through the sacrospinous ligament has good anatomical results at midterm follow-up with significant improvement in symptoms and quality of life and is associated with few complications. Obstructive symptoms reported in cases of rectocele can be improved by transvaginal mesh repair.


Genital prolapse Vaginal surgery Medium weight polypropylene mesh Quality of life Rectoanal function 



Pelvic organ prolapse


Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system


International Continence Society


Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire


Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory


Colorectal-Anal Impact Questionnaire


Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory


  1. 1.
    Benson JT, Lucente V, McClellan E (1996) Vaginal versus abdominal reconstructive surgery for the treatment of pelvic support defects: a prospective randomized study with long-term outcome evaluation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:1418–1421, discussion 1421–1422PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Julian TM (1996) The efficacy of Marlex mesh in the repair of severe, recurrent vaginal prolapse of the anterior midvaginal wall. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:1472–1475PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nguyen JN, Burchette RJ (2008) Outcome after anterior vaginal prolapse repair: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 111:891–898PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sivaslioglu AA, Unlubilgin E, Dolen I (2008) A randomized comparison of polypropylene mesh surgery with site-specific surgery in the treatment of cystocoele. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19:467–471PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hiltunen R, Nieminen K, Takala T, Heiskanen E, Merikari M, Niemi K et al (2007) Low-weight polypropylene mesh for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 110:455–462PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Altman D, Väyrynen T, Engh ME, Axelsen S, Falconer C, Nordic Transvaginal Mesh Group (2011) Anterior colporrhaphy versus transvaginal mesh for pelvic-organ prolapse. N Engl J Med 364:1826–1836PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vollebregt A, Fischer K, Gietelink D, van der Vaart CH (2011) Primary surgical repair of anterior vaginal prolapse: a randomised trial comparing anatomical and functional outcome between anterior colporrhaphy and trocar-guided transobturator anterior mesh. BJOG 118:1518–1527PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Withagen MI, Milani AL, den Boon J, Vervest HA, Vierhout ME (2011) Trocar-guided mesh compared with conventional vaginal repair in recurrent prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 117:242–250PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Adams EJ, Hagen S, Glazener CM (2010) Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:CD004014PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    van den Esschert JW, van Geloven AA, Vermulst N, Groenedijk AG, de Wit LT, Gerhards MF (2008) Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for obstructed defecation syndrome. Surg Endosc 22:2728–2732PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    de Tayrac R, Deval B, Fernandez H, Marès P, Mapi Research Institute (2007) Development of a linguistically validated French version of two short-form, condition-specific quality of life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7). J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 36:738–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    de Tayrac R, Gervaise A, Chauveaud A, Fernandez H (2005) Tension-free polypropylene mesh for vaginal repair of anterior vaginal wall prolapse. J Reprod Med 50:75–80PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eglin G, Ska JM, Serres X (2003) Transobturator subvesical mesh. Tolerance and short-term results of a 103 case continuous series. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 31:14–19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    de Tayrac R, Picone O, Chauveaud-Lambling A, Fernandez H (2006) A 2-year anatomical and functional assessment of transvaginal rectocele repair using a polypropylene mesh. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 17:100–105PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brubaker L, Barber MD, Nygaard I, Nager CW, Varner E, Schaffer J, et al (2010) Quantification of vaginal support: are continuous summary scores better than POPQ stage? Am J Obstet Gynecol 203:512.e1–512.e6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jacquetin B, Fatton B, Rosenthal C, Clavé H, Debodinance P, Hinoul P et al (2010) Total transvaginal mesh (TVM) technique for treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: a 3-year prospective follow-up study. Int Urogynecol J 21:1455–1462PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cundiff GW, Fenner D (2004) Evaluation and treatment of women with rectocele: focus on associated defecatory and sexual dysfunction. Obstet Gynecol 104:1403–1421PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Altman D, Väyrynen T, Engh ME, Axelsen S, Falconer C, Nordic Transvaginal Mesh Group (2008) Short-term outcome after transvaginal mesh repair of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19:787–793PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Flam F (2007) Sedation and local anaesthesia for vaginal pelvic floor repair of genital prolapse using mesh. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18:1471–1475PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gauruder-Burmester A, Koutouzidou P, Rohne J, Gronewold M, Tunn R (2007) Follow-up after polypropylene mesh repair of anterior and posterior compartments in patients with recurrent prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18:1059–1064PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Paraiso MF, Barber MD, Muir TW, Walters MD (2006) Rectocele repair: a randomized trial of three surgical techniques including graft augmentation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 195:1762–1771PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Withagen MI, Vierhout ME, Milani AL (2010) Does trocar-guided tension-free vaginal mesh (Prolift) repair provoke prolapse of the unaffected compartments? Int Urogynecol J 21:271–278PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Long CY, Hsu CS, Jang MY, Liu CM, Chiang PH, Tsai EM (2011) Comparison of clinical outcome and urodynamic findings using “Perigee and/or Apogee” versus “Prolift anterior and/or posterior” system devices for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 22:233–239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jia X, Glazener C, Mowatt G, MacLennan G, Bain C, Fraser C et al (2008) Efficacy and safety of using mesh or grafts in surgery for anterior and/or posterior vaginal wall prolapse: systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG 115:1350–1361PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gustilo-Ashby AM, Paraiso MF, Jelovsek JE, Walters MD, Barber MD (2007) Bowel symptoms 1 year after surgery for prolapse: further analysis of a randomized trial of rectocele repair. Am J Obstet Gynecol 197:76.e1–76.e5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kahn MA, Stanton SL (1997) Posterior colporrhaphy: its effects on bowel and sexual function. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 104:82–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Barber MD, Kuchibhatla MN, Pieper CF, Bump RC (2001) Psychometric evaluation of 2 comprehensive condition-specific quality of life instruments for women with pelvic floor disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:1388–1395PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Altomare DF, Spazzafumo L, Rinaldi M, Dodi G, Ghiselli R, Piloni V (2008) Set-up and statistical validation of a new scoring system for obstructed defaecation syndrome. Colorectal Dis 10:84–88PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Burrows LJ, Meyn LA, Walters MD, Weber AM (2004) Pelvic symptoms in women with pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 104:982–988PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sand PK, Koduri S, Lobel RW et al (2001) Prospective randomized trial of polyglactin 910 mesh to prevent recurrence of cystoceles and rectoceles. Am J Obstet Gynecol 184:1357–1362PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecological Association 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pascal Mourtialon
    • 1
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
  • Vincent Letouzey
    • 2
  • Georges Eglin
    • 3
  • Renaud de Tayrac
    • 2
  • French Ugytex Study Group
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynaecologyBocage University HospitalDijonFrance
  2. 2.Department of Obstetrics and GynaecologyCarémeau University HospitalNîmesFrance
  3. 3.Department of Obstetrics and GynaecologyChampeau Private HospitalBéziersFrance
  4. 4.Service de Gynecologie-Obstétrique et médecine de la reproduction humaineCentre hospitalier universitaireDijon CedexFrance
  5. 5.Centre d’épidémiologie des populationsINSERM EA 4184, Université de BourgogneDijonFrance
  6. 6.Faculté de médecine, Université de BourgogneDijonFrance

Personalised recommendations