Comparison between trans-obturator trans-vaginal mesh and traditional anterior colporrhaphy in the treatment of anterior vaginal wall prolapse: results of a French RCT
- First Online:
- 545 Downloads
Introduction and hypothesis
To compare the efficacy of a collagen-coated polypropylene mesh and anterior colporrhaphy in the treatment of stage 2 or more anterior vaginal wall prolapse.
Prospective, randomized, multicenter study conducted between April 2005 and December 2009. The principal endpoint was the recurrence rate of stage 2 or more anterior vaginal wall prolapse 12 months after surgery. Secondary endpoints consisted of functional results and mesh-related morbidity.
One hundred and forty-seven patients were included, randomized and analyzed: 72 in the anterior colporrhaphy group and 75 in the mesh group. The anatomical success rate was significantly higher in the mesh group (89 %) than in the colporrhaphy group (64 %) (p = 0.0006). Anatomical and functional recurrence was also less frequent in the mesh group (31.3 % vs 52.2 %, p = 0.007). Two patients (2.8 %) were reoperated on in the colporrhaphy group for anterior vaginal wall prolapse recurrence. No significant difference was noted regarding minor complications. An erosion rate of 9.5 % was noted. De novo dyspareunia occurred in 1/14 patients in the colporrhaphy group and in 3/13 patients in the mesh group. An analysis of the quality of life questionnaires showed an overall improvement in both groups, with no statistical difference between them. Satisfaction rates were high in both groups (92 % in the colporrhaphy group and 96 % in the mesh group).
Trans-obturator Ugytex® mesh used to treat anterior vaginal wall prolapse gives better 1-year anatomical results than traditional anterior colporrhaphy, but with small a increase in morbidity in the mesh group.
KeywordsPelvic organ prolapse Cystocele Vaginal surgery Polypropylene mesh Anterior colporrhaphy
- 16.FDA Safety Communication: UPDATE on Serious Complications Associated with Transvaginal Placement of Surgical Mesh for Pelvic Organ Prolapse. http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/AlertsandNotices/ucm262435.htm. Accessed 08 Aug 2011
- 17.De Tayrac R, Chauveaud-Lambling A, Fernandez D et al (2003) Quality of life instruments for women with pelvic organ prolapse. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 32:503–507Google Scholar
- 21.Haylen BT, Freeman RM, Swift SE et al (2011) An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) / International Continence Society (ICS) joint terminology and classification of the complications related directly to the insertion of prostheses (meshes, implants, tapes) & grafts in female pelvic floor surgery. Int Urogynecol J 22:3–15CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 22.De Tayrac R, Devoldere G, Renaudie J et al (2007) Prolapse repair by vaginal route using a new protected low-weight polypropylene mesh: 1-year functional and anatomical outcome in a prospective multicentre study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18:251–256Google Scholar
- 30.De Tayrac R, Alves A, Therin M (2007) Collagen-coated vs noncoated low-weight polypropylene meshes in a sheep model for vaginal surgery. A pilot study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 18:513–520Google Scholar