title: Colporrhaphy compared with mesh or graft-reinforced vaginal paravaginal repair for anterior vaginal wall prolapse: a randomized controlled trial.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To report 2-year outcomes of a randomized controlled trial comparing standard anterior colporrhaphy with reinforced vaginal paravaginal repair using xenograft or synthetic mesh in women with symptomatic anterior vaginal wall prolapse.
  
  
  METHODS
  Women with stage II or greater anterior prolapse were randomly assigned to three groups: anterior colporrhaphy, paravaginal repair with porcine dermis, or polypropylene mesh. Outcomes of prolapse stage, quality of life, degree of bother, and sexual symptoms were assessed by blinded examiners and validated measures at 2 years. Anatomic failure was defined as anterior prolapse at stage II or greater. Composite failure was defined as symptoms of "bulge" and anterior prolapse at stage II or greater. Power calculations determined 33 participants per arm would detect a 40% difference in anatomic success between standard and grafted repair. χ, Mann-Whitney U, and Student's t tests were used for comparisons.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Of the 99 participants enrolled, 78 (79%) completed a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Those with mesh had a significantly lower anatomic failure rate (18%) than both the porcine (46%, P=.015) and colporrhaphy groups (58%, P=.002). All groups had statistically similar reductions in their prolapse and urinary symptom subscale scores. Composite failure was not statistically different between groups: 13% colporrhaphy, 12% porcine, and 4% mesh. Two reoperations for anterior prolapse occurred in the porcine group. Mesh erosion rates were 14% for the mesh group.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Vaginal paravaginal repair with polypropylene mesh has the lowest anatomic failure rate when compared with that with xenograft and anterior colporrhaphy without differences in composite failures.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT0139171.
  
  
  METHODS
  I.
authors: From the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kaiser Permanente San Diego, the Department of Reproductive Medicine, University of California San Diego, and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, California; and the Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Kaiser Permanente Downey, Downey, California.
authors: Shawn A
authors: SA
authors: Menefee
authors: Keisha Y
authors: KY
authors: Dyer
authors: Emily S
authors: ES
authors: Lukacz
authors: Amanda J
authors: AJ
authors: Simsiman
authors: Karl M
authors: KM
authors: Luber
authors: John N
authors: JN
authors: Nguyen
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000818:Animals; D020405:Dermis / Q000637:transplantation*; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D005260:Female; D013509:Gynecologic Surgical Procedures; D006801:Humans; D008875:Middle Aged; D013526:Surgical Mesh; D013552:Swine; D014183:Transplantation, Heterologous; D017211:Treatment Failure; D014596:Uterine Prolapse / Q000601:surgery*; D014621:Vagina / Q000601:surgery