Surgery for women with anterior compartment prolapse

BACKGROUND: Anterior compartment prolapse is the most common pelvic organ prolapse. Clinicians have utilised various surgical techniques to minimise the rate of recurrent pelvic organ prolapse (POP). OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and harms of surgery for anterior compartment prolapse. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register on 29 April 2024. This includes records indexed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP. We also handsearched journals, conference proceedings and the reference lists of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared surgical operations in women with anterior compartment prolapse. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed their risk of bias and extracted their data. MAIN RESULTS: = 60%). Dyspareunia was not reported. De novo dyspareunia is probably more likely to be reported with permanent anterior vaginal mesh than after abdominal sacrocolpopexy (RR 2.15, 95% CI 1.17 to 3.98; 2 RCTs, 248 women; moderate certainty); the result suggests that if 10% of women reported dyspareunia after abdominal sacrocolpopexy, 12% to 40% would do so with permanent anterior vaginal mesh. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Recurrence is probably more likely after native tissue repair than with biological graft or absorbable synthetic mesh at one to two years. We found no data for surgery for stress urinary incontinence. Anterior native tissue repair likely increases awareness of prolapse, recurrence and surgery for prolapse compared with transvaginal anterior permanent mesh repair. It is likely that fewer women report dyspareunia after abdominal sacrocolpopexy than with permanent mesh repair. For other outcomes, there was little or no difference between the groups being compared. Many of the transvaginal permanent meshes evaluated have been removed from the market because of reported complications. Five studies tested mesh kits that are currently available. We suggest that clinicians and women use caution when utilising these products as their long-term safety and efficacy have not yet been established.