Abstract
Several transvaginal mesh products have been marketed to address vaginal vault prolapse. Although data are limited, prolapse recurrence rates and subjective outcome measures seem to be equivalent for vaginal mesh compared with native tissue apical prolapse repair, and the different vaginal meshes have not proven superior to one another. Given the known unique complications specific to vaginal mesh with equivalent outcomes for the apical vaginal prolapse, it is reasonable to reserve mesh use for specific high-risk cases, such as patients with large apical prolapse recurrence after native tissue repair who are not candidates for sacrocolpopexy.
