Laparoscopic promontory sacral colpopexy: is the posterior, recto-vaginal, mesh mandatory?
OBJECTIVE
The aim of our retrospective study was to determine if systematic placement of a posterior mesh, in addition to an anterior vesico-vaginal mesh, is necessary for laparoscopic treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.


METHODS
A laparoscopic promontory sacral colpopexy was performed in 108 patients, including 55 patients with a concurrent laparoscopic Burch procedure (50.9%). We compared 33 patients treated with a single anterior mesh (SAM) and 71 treated with a double, anterior and posterior, mesh (DM).


RESULTS
The difference between the SAM and DM groups was statistically significant in terms of posterior compartment failure (rectocele and/or enterocele): 31.3% and 5.9%, respectively (p=0.0006). This significant difference persisted in the Burch (B) group (p=0.001), but not in the non-Burch (NB) group (p=0.98). Among the SAM group, this difference between the B and NB groups, was significant (57.1% versus 0%; p=0.0015) and above all not a single posterior failure was observed in the NB group.


CONCLUSIONS
The placement of a posterior mesh, if highly effective, appeared unnecessary in the absence of an associated Burch procedure or a patent posterior prolapse. The posterior mesh also increased risk of postoperative complications and side effects.
Antiphon
P
P
Service d'Urologie, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France. patrick.antiphon@worldonline.fr
Elard
S
S
Benyoussef
A
A
Fofana
M
M
Yiou
R
R
Gettman
M
M
Hoznek
A
A
Vordos
D
D
Chopin
D K
DK
Abbou
C C
CC
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D010535:Laparoscopy / Q000009:adverse effects; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000453:epidemiology; D012007:Rectum; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013526:Surgical Mesh; D013520:Urologic Surgical Procedures / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods; D014596:Uterine Prolapse / Q000601:surgery*; D014621:Vagina