Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To improve our understanding of the differences in commonly used synthetic prolapse meshes, we compared four newer generation meshes to Gynecare PS using a tensile testing protocol. We hypothesize that the newer meshes have inferior biomechanical properties. METHODS: Meshes were loaded to failure (n = 5 per group) generating load-elongation curves from which the stiffness, the load at failure, and the relative elongation were determined. Additional mesh samples (n = 3) underwent a cyclic loading protocol to measure permanent elongation in response to subfailure loading. RESULTS: With the exception of Popmesh, which displayed uniform stiffness, other meshes were characterized by a bilinear behavior. Newer meshes were 70-90% less stiff than Gynecare (p < 0.05) and more readily deformed in response to uniaxial and cyclical loading (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Relative to Gynecare, the newer generation of prolapse meshes were significantly less stiff, with irreversible deformation at significantly lower loads.