Introduction and hypothesis: This study reports the long-term anatomic and subjective outcomes following sacrocolpopexy based on mesh weight and provides device-specific data. Methods: This cohort study compared ultra-lightweight (≤ 20 g/m2) with lightweight mesh (≥ 25 g/m2). The primary outcome was composite failure defined as at least one of ≥ stage 2 apical prolapse, anterior or posterior vaginal wall beyond hymen, complaint of bulge or retreatment. Effect measure estimates were calculated as the incidence rate ratio of composite failure comparing the use of ultra-light with lightweight mesh. Crude and adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were obtained using uni- and multivariable Poisson regression models. Results: Of 358 women who met inclusion criteria, 220 (61%) agreed to attend for review; 95 (43%) had ultra-lightweight mesh and 125 (57%) had lightweight mesh including UpsylonTM. Median follow-up for ultra-light and lightweight mesh was 36 (IQR 22–42) and 63 (IQR 48–87) months, respectively (p < 0.001). Accounting for differences in follow-up time, there was no significant difference in composite failure between ultra-light and lightweight mesh groups (IRR 1.47, 95% CI 0.83–2.52, p = 0.15). This persisted after adjustment for age, body mass index, parity, smoking and presence of advanced prolapse prior to surgery (IRR 1.52, 95% CI 0.94–2.47, p = 0.087). Mesh exposure for both groups was mostly asymptomatic, and the rate was 7% for the ultra-light group and 8% in the lightweight group. Overall, repeat surgery for recurrent apical prolapse and mesh exposure occurred in 4% and 2%, respectively. Conclusions: Ultra-lightweight mesh appears to have similar incidence rate of failure compared to lightweight mesh. UpsylonTM mesh has a similar low rate of recurrent apical prolapse and mesh exposure.
- Long-term outcomes
- Mesh weight