loading page

Serious complications and recurrences after pelvic organ prolapse surgery for 2309 women in the VIGI-MESH registry
  • +21
  • Xavier Fritel,
  • Renaud de Tayrac,
  • Joe de Keizer,
  • Sandrine Campagne-Loiseau,
  • Michel Cosson,
  • Philippe Ferry,
  • Xavier Deffieux,
  • Jean-Philippe Lucot,
  • Laurent Wagner,
  • Philippe Debodinance,
  • Christian Saussine,
  • Anne-Cécile Pizzoferrato,
  • Caroline Carlier-Guérin,
  • Thibault Thubert,
  • Laure Panel,
  • Pierre-Olivier Bosset,
  • Elvis Nkounkou,
  • Rajeev Ramanah,
  • Thomas Boisramé,
  • Thomas Charles,
  • Cyril Raiffort,
  • Amélie Charvériat,
  • Stéphanie Ragot,
  • Arnaud Fauconnier
Xavier Fritel
CHU de Poitiers

Corresponding Author:[email protected]

Author Profile
Renaud de Tayrac
CHU Carémeau
Author Profile
Joe de Keizer
Université de Poitiers UFR Médecine et Pharmacie
Author Profile
Sandrine Campagne-Loiseau
CHU Estaing
Author Profile
Michel Cosson
Hopital Jeanne de Flandre, Centre Hospitalier Regional Universitaire de Lille
Author Profile
Philippe Ferry
CH La Rochelle
Author Profile
Xavier Deffieux
CHU Antoine Beclere
Author Profile
Jean-Philippe Lucot
Hôpital Saint-Vincent de Paul
Author Profile
Laurent Wagner
Medical University Nimes
Author Profile
Philippe Debodinance
CH Dunkerque
Author Profile
Christian Saussine
CHU Strasbourg
Author Profile
Anne-Cécile Pizzoferrato
CHU Caen
Author Profile
Caroline Carlier-Guérin
CH de Châtellerault
Author Profile
Thibault Thubert
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes
Author Profile
Laure Panel
Clinique Beau Soleil
Author Profile
Pierre-Olivier Bosset
Hôpital Foch
Author Profile
Elvis Nkounkou
CH de Béthune
Author Profile
Rajeev Ramanah
CHU Besancon
Author Profile
Thomas Boisramé
CHU Strasbourg
Author Profile
Thomas Charles
CHU Poitiers
Author Profile
Cyril Raiffort
Groupe Hospitalier Diaconesses Croix Saint-Simon Site Avron
Author Profile
Amélie Charvériat
CHU de Poitiers
Author Profile
Stéphanie Ragot
Université de Poitiers UFR Médecine et Pharmacie
Author Profile
Arnaud Fauconnier
CHI Poissy-Saint-Germain-en-Laye Pôle femme-mère-enfant
Author Profile


Objective: To assess the incidence of serious complications and reoperations for recurrence after pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery and compare the three most common types of repair. Design: Prospective cohort study using a registry. Setting: 19 surgical centres in France. Population: 2309 women participated between 2017 and 2019. Methods: a multivariate analysis including an inverse probability of treatment weighting approach was used to obtain three comparable groups. Main outcome measures: Serious complications and subsequent reoperations for POP recurrence Results: Mean follow-up was 16.6 months. Surgeries included in the analysis were native tissue vaginal repair (N=504), transvaginal mesh placement (692), and laparoscopic sacropexy with mesh (1113). Serious complications occurred among 52 women (2.3%), and reoperation for recurrence was required for 32 (1.4%). At one year, the cumulative weighted incidence of serious complications was 1.8% for native tissue vaginal repair (95% confidence interval 0-3.9), 3.9% for transvaginal mesh (2.0-5.9), and 2.2% for sacropexy (1.1-2.6). Compared with the native tissue vaginal repair group, the risk of serious complications was higher in the transvaginal mesh group (weighted-HR 3.84, 2.43-6.08), and the sacropexy group (2.48, 1.45-4.23), while the risk of reoperation for prolapse recurrence was reduced in both groups (transvaginal mesh [0.22, 0.13-0.39] and sacropexy [0.29, 0.18-0.47]). Conclusions: Laparoscopic sacropexy with mesh appears to have a better risk profile (few serious complications and few reoperations for recurrence) than transvaginal mesh placement (more serious complications) and native tissue vaginal repair (more reoperations for recurrence). These results are useful for informing women and for shared decision making.
29 Mar 2021Submitted to BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
31 Mar 2021Submission Checks Completed
31 Mar 2021Assigned to Editor
02 Apr 2021Reviewer(s) Assigned
22 Apr 2021Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending
28 May 2021Editorial Decision: Revise Major
05 Jul 20211st Revision Received
07 Jul 2021Submission Checks Completed
07 Jul 2021Assigned to Editor
07 Jul 2021Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending
28 Jul 2021Editorial Decision: Accept
Mar 2022Published in BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology volume 129 issue 4 on pages 656-663. 10.1111/1471-0528.16892