We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
A 3-year follow-up after anterior colporrhaphy compared with collagen-coated transvaginal mesh for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomised controlled trial.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the 1-year (previously published) and 3-year objective and subjective cure rates, and complications, related to the use of a collagen-coated transvaginal mesh for anterior vaginal wall prolapse against a conventional anterior repair.
DESIGN: Randomised controlled study.
SETTING: Six departments of obstetrics and gynaecology in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark.
POPULATION: A total of 138 women, of 55 years of age or older, admitted for stage ≥2 anterior vaginal wall prolapse.
METHODS: The women scheduled for primary anterior vaginal wall prolapse surgery were randomised between conventional anterior colporrhaphy and surgery with a collagen-coated prolene mesh. All patients were evaluated using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) assessment before and after surgery. Symptoms related to pelvic organ prolapse were evaluated using the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) and the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Objective cure, defined as POP-Q stage <2 prolapse at the 1- and 3-year follow-ups. Furthermore, mesh exposure and dyspareunia were also recorded.
RESULTS: In total, 138 patients (70 from the mesh group versus 68 from the conventional anterior colporrhaphy group) out of 160 (86.3%) participated in the 3-year follow-up. POP-Q revealed an objective anatomic cure for 88.1 and 91.4%, respectively, in the mesh group at the 1- and 3-year follow-ups, compared with 39.9 and 41.2% in the colporrhaphy group. No difference between the groups was observed regarding PFIQ-7, PFDI-20, and Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12) scores. The number of mesh exposures did not change during the study period and all exposures were minor.
CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that although the objective outcome was superior in the mesh group, the use of mesh had no impact on the subjective outcome.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: POP-Q deteriorates after anterior prolapse surgery but remains stable in women with mesh implantation.
DESIGN: Randomised controlled study.
SETTING: Six departments of obstetrics and gynaecology in Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark.
POPULATION: A total of 138 women, of 55 years of age or older, admitted for stage ≥2 anterior vaginal wall prolapse.
METHODS: The women scheduled for primary anterior vaginal wall prolapse surgery were randomised between conventional anterior colporrhaphy and surgery with a collagen-coated prolene mesh. All patients were evaluated using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) assessment before and after surgery. Symptoms related to pelvic organ prolapse were evaluated using the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) and the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Objective cure, defined as POP-Q stage <2 prolapse at the 1- and 3-year follow-ups. Furthermore, mesh exposure and dyspareunia were also recorded.
RESULTS: In total, 138 patients (70 from the mesh group versus 68 from the conventional anterior colporrhaphy group) out of 160 (86.3%) participated in the 3-year follow-up. POP-Q revealed an objective anatomic cure for 88.1 and 91.4%, respectively, in the mesh group at the 1- and 3-year follow-ups, compared with 39.9 and 41.2% in the colporrhaphy group. No difference between the groups was observed regarding PFIQ-7, PFDI-20, and Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12) scores. The number of mesh exposures did not change during the study period and all exposures were minor.
CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that although the objective outcome was superior in the mesh group, the use of mesh had no impact on the subjective outcome.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: POP-Q deteriorates after anterior prolapse surgery but remains stable in women with mesh implantation.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app