title: Transvaginal mesh repair of anterior and posterior vaginal wall prolapse: a clinical and ultrasonographic study.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To investigate whether ultrasonography coupled with clinical examination can help in understanding the mechanism of recurrence after transvaginal mesh repair of anterior and posterior vaginal wall prolapse.
  
  
  METHODS
  Ninety-one patients who had undergone surgery for anterior and/or posterior vaginal wall prolapse with the Prolift system had a clinical examination and introital/endovaginal two-dimensional ultrasonography a minimum of 1 year later. The retraction of anterior and posterior meshes was estimated relative to the original length of the mesh by transvaginal palpation. Patients with no, moderate (< 50%) or severe (> or = 50%) mesh retraction were compared. Anterior recurrence of prolapse was defined according to the International Continence Society by a Ba value > or = -1 and posterior recurrence by a Bp value > or = -1 (where Ba represents the most distal position of the anterior vaginal wall and Bp the most distal position of the posterior vaginal wall). On ultrasonography, two distances were measured in the midsagittal plane: Distance 1, from the distal margin of the anterior mesh to the bladder neck, and Distance 2, from the distal margin of the posterior mesh to the rectoanal junction.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Seventy-five anterior and 62 posterior meshes were studied at a mean follow-up of 17.9 months. Patients with anterior recurrence presented significantly more often with severe anterior mesh retraction compared with patients without anterior recurrence (5/8 vs. 2/67, P < 0.001) and also had an increased Distance 1 (P < 0.001). Patients with posterior recurrence presented significantly more often with severe posterior mesh retraction compared with patients without posterior recurrence (3/4 vs. 3/58, P < 0.01) and also had an increased Distance 2 (P < 0.01).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Recurrence of prolapse after transvaginal mesh repair appears to be associated with severe mesh retraction and loss of mesh support on the distal part of the vaginal walls.
authors.affiliation: CHU Clermont-Ferrand, Maternité, Service de Gynécologie Obstétrique, Hôtel-Dieu, Clermont-Ferrand, France. lukavelemir@yahoo.fr
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Velemir
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Amblard
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Fatton
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Savary
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Jacquetin
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008875:Middle Aged; D018570:Risk Assessment; D055502:Secondary Prevention; D013526:Surgical Mesh / Q000009:adverse effects*; D013536:Suture Techniques; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014463:Ultrasonography; D014596:Uterine Prolapse / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000517:prevention & control / Q000601:surgery*; D014621:Vagina / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*