Laparoscopic promontory sacral colpopexy: is the posterior, recto-vaginal, mesh mandatory?

OBJECTIVE(S): 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.

CONCLUSION(S): 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.