Abstract
The objective of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of traditional vaginal surgery and transvaginal mesh (TVM) surgery on severe pelvic organ prolapse (POP). We performed a retrospective chart review study of 258 severe POP patients who underwent surgery between November 2010 and September 2016. One hundred forty patients underwent traditional vaginal surgery and 118 TVM surgery. The Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantitation (POP-Q) staging was used for objective evaluation. The Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (PFDI-20), Pelvic Floor Disease Life Impact Questionnaire Simplified Version-7 (PFIQ-7), and Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12) were used for subjective evaluation. Their complications were also recorded. All the data were collected in the outpatient department through the follow-up at 3 months, 1, 3, and 5 years after the operation. Forty patients in the traditional vaginal surgery group and 25 in the TVM group were lost to follow-up. There was no difference in the POP-Q score between the groups (P = 0.346). The recurrence rate increased with follow-up time, reaching nearly 20% in the two groups by 5 years. The TVM group has higher PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 scores and lower PISQ-12 scores than the traditional vaginal surgery group at six months, 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively (P < 0.001). Mesh exposure has occurred in the TVM group. Both surgeries showed similar objective satisfaction and recurrence rate. However, traditional vaginal surgery has higher subjective satisfaction than TVM in our study and does not risk exposure to prosthetic material.