title: Retrospective comparison between the Prolift and Elevate anterior vaginal mesh procedures: 18-month clinical outcome.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  There are few direct comparisons between the first-generation trocar-guided and the second-generation single-incision mesh systems in the treatment of anterior pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Hence, the purpose of this retrospective review was to compare 18-month operative success in female patients who had undergone POP surgery with the anterior Prolift (n = 52) or the anterior Elevate mesh (n = 62).
  
  
  METHODS
  Subjective (bulge symptoms) and objective measures (absence of anterior or apical descent beyond the hymen, POP-Q anterior stage 0 or I, no retreatment for POP) were used as the measures of surgical efficacy. Postoperative pelvic floor pain, dyspareunia, de novo overactive bladder (OAB), de novo stress urinary incontinence (SUI), and mesh exposure were addressed as complications of POP surgery.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The two groups did not differ with regard to the subjective and objective measures of the operative efficacy. There were no between-group differences in the proportion of women reporting postoperative pelvic floor pain, dyspareunia, de novo SUI, and de novo OAB symptoms (all p values >0.05). The proportion of patients with postoperative vaginal exposure was significantly higher in the Prolift group (7.7 %) than in the Elevate group (0.0 %; p = 0.02).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In conclusion, our results suggest that the use of the Elevate system in patients with anterior compartment prolapse results in fewer mesh erosions, but similar efficacy, compared with the Prolift mesh.
authors.affiliation: Department of Gynecology and Oncological Gynecology, Military Institute of Medicine, 128 Szaserow Street, 04-141, Warsaw, Poland. arogowski@op.pl.
authors.forename: Artur
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Rogowski
authors.affiliation: Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland.
authors.forename: Przemyslaw
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Bienkowski
authors.affiliation: Department of Gynecology and Oncological Gynecology, Military Institute of Medicine, 128 Szaserow Street, 04-141, Warsaw, Poland.
authors.forename: Dariusz
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Tarwacki
authors.affiliation: Department of Gynecology and Oncological Gynecology, Military Institute of Medicine, 128 Szaserow Street, 04-141, Warsaw, Poland.
authors.forename: Monika
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Szafarowska
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychiatry, Pomeranian Medical University, Szczecin, Poland.
authors.forename: Jerzy
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Samochowiec
authors.affiliation: Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland.
authors.forename: Halina
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Sienkiewicz-Jarosz
authors.affiliation: Department of Gynecology and Oncological Gynecology, Military Institute of Medicine, 128 Szaserow Street, 04-141, Warsaw, Poland.
authors.forename: Malgorzata
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Jerzak
authors.affiliation: Department of Gynecology and Oncological Gynecology, Military Institute of Medicine, 128 Szaserow Street, 04-141, Warsaw, Poland.
authors.forename: Wlodzimierz
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Baranowski
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008875:Middle Aged; D056887:Pelvic Organ Prolapse / Q000150:complications / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000601:surgery*; D011183:Postoperative Complications; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013526:Surgical Mesh; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome
keywords: Elevate mesh; Operative success; Pelvic organ prolapse; Prolift mesh