Objective: To compare the use of polypropylene mesh (PM) and the traditional anterior vaginal wall colporraphy in women with anterior vaginal wall prolapse (AVWP) using objective and subjective tests and evaluation of quality of life (QoL). Materials and Methods: One hundred women were randomly distributed in two preoperatory groups. The first group (mesh) (n = 45) received a PM implant and the control group (n = 55) was submitted to traditional colporraphy. Postoperatory follow-up was done after 12 months. The primary objective was the correction of the Ba point ≤ -2 POP-Q (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System) and the secondary objective was the improvement of vaginal symptoms and QoL through ICIQ-VS (International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire -Vaginal Symptoms). Complications related to the use of PM or not were also described.Results: There was a significant difference between all POP-Q measures of pre-and postoperatory periods of each group in particular. There was a significant difference of the Ba point of the postoperatory period between the Mesh and Control group. The mean of Ba point in the Mesh group was statistically lower than of the Control group, depicting the better anatomical result of the first group. Both techniques improved vaginal symptoms and QoL. The most frequent complication of the Mesh group was prepubic hematoma in the perioperative period. In 9.3% of the cases treated with mesh it was observed PM exposition at the anterior vaginal wall after 12 months, being most of them treated clinically. Conclusion: The treatment of AVWP significantly improved the Ba point in the Mesh group in comparison to the Control group. There were no differences of the vaginal symptoms and QoL between the two groups after 12 months. There were few and low grade complications on both groups.

Objective: To compare the effects of two surgical procedures for the correction of anterior vaginal wall prolapse (AVWP) on the lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) using symptom questionnaires and quality of life (QoL). Materials and Methods: One hundred women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification stage (POP-Q) ≥ 2 were randomly distributed in two preoperatory groups. The first group (mesh) (n = 45) received a polypropylene mesh (PM) implant and the control group (n = 55) was submitted to anterior colporraphy with or without synthetic sling. Postoperatory follow-up was done after 12 months. The primary objective was to compare the effect of the surgeries on LUTS using the final scores of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UI SF) and Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OAB-V8), as well as the analysis of the incapacitating urinary symptoms and "de novo" urinary symptoms after 12 months of surgery in both groups. Results: Although there was a different number of women in each group, randomization was adequate, resulted in homogeneous groups that could be compared regarding socio demographic, clinical and gynecological (POP-Q) variables. Patients of both groups showed improvements regarding LUTS and QoL, whether using polypropylene mesh or not, based on the final scores of the ICIQ-UI SF and OAB-V8 questionnaires after 12-month follow--up. There were few incapacitating and "de novo" urinary symptoms, without any significant statistical difference between both groups after 12 months of surgery. Conclusion: There was a general improvement of LUTS and QoL in both groups after 12-month follow-up. However, there was no significant difference of LUTS, as well as the more incapacitating and "de novo" urinary symptoms between both groups after 12 months of surgery. INTRODuCTIONThe decision to perform a prophylactic anti-incontinence surgery in women with suspicion of a hidden stress urinary incontinence (SUI) during a surgery for correction of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is controversial. At present, this approach has been recommended during evaluation of

No abstract