Skip to main content
. 2016 Feb 9;2016(2):CD012079. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012079

Comparison 2. Absorbable mesh versus native tissue repair.

Outcome or subgroup title No. of studies No. of participants Statistical method Effect size
1 Awareness of prolapse (2 year review) 1 54 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 1.05 [0.77, 1.44]
2 Repeat surgery for prolapse (2 years) 1 66 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.47 [0.09, 2.40]
3 Recurrent prolapse (3 months ‐2 years) 3 292 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.71 [0.52, 0.96]
3.1 Any site stage 2 or more 1 66 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.53 [0.10, 2.70]
3.2 Anterior compartment 2 226 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.72 [0.53, 0.98]
4 Death 2 175 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
4.1 absorbable mesh versus native tissue repair 2 175 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
5 Objective failure of anterior compartment (cystocoele) 2 226 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.72 [0.53, 0.98]
5.1 Anterior compartment repair: absorbable mesh versus native tissue 1 83 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.91 [0.62, 1.34]
5.2 Multi‐compartment repair: absorbable mesh versus native tissue 1 143 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.58 [0.35, 0.93]
6 Objective failure of posterior compartment (rectocoele) 1 132 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 1.13 [0.40, 3.19]
6.1 Multi‐compartment repair: absorbable mesh versus native tissue 1 132 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 1.13 [0.40, 3.19]
7 Stress urinary incontinence 1   Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) Subtotals only
7.1 Postoperative SUI 1 49 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 1.38 [0.95, 2.00]
8 Quality of life (2 years) 1 54 Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.0 [‐2.82, 2.82]
8.1 VAS QoL 1 54 Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.0 [‐2.82, 2.82]