It is very uncertain whether vaginal hysterectomy changes mesh exposure compared with sacral hysteropexy/cervicopexy (uterine prolapse) (very low certainty).
It is very uncertain whether vaginal hysteropexy changes mesh exposure (1‐4 years) compared with sacral hysteropexy (uterine prolapse) (very low certainty).
Absorbable showed no clear difference in suture/mesh exposure compared with non absorbable sutures (low certainty).
It is very uncertain whether prophylactic antibiotics (single or combined drugs) changes number of mesh exposures within six weeks after the operation compared with placebo or no treatment (very low certainty).
Laparoscopic colposuspension may leads to lower subjective cure within 18 months: laparoscopic colposuspension using… compared with midurethral sling procedures (low certainty).
It is very uncertain whether laparoscopic colposuspension changes subjective cure within 18 months: laparoscopic colposuspension using… compared with open colposuspension (very low certainty).
It is very uncertain whether laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures changes subjective cure within 18 months compared with laparoscopic colposuspension with mesh and staples (very low certainty).
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
It is very uncertain whether laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures changes repeat continence surgery: compared with laparoscopic colposuspension with mesh and staples (very low certainty).
Laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures may leads to higher adverse effects: perioperative complications (number of events) compared with laparoscopic colposuspension with mesh and staples (low certainty).
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
Laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures showed no clear difference in adverse effects: de novo detrusor overactivity (urodynamic diagnosis) compared with laparoscopic colposuspension with mesh and staples (low certainty).
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
Transvaginal biological graft showed no clear difference in surgery for recurrent prolapse (1 to 2 years) compared with native tissue repair (moderate certainty).
Transvaginal biological graft showed no clear difference in recurrent prolapse on examination compared with native tissue repair (low certainty).
Transvaginal biological graft showed no clear difference in visceral injury compared with native tissue repair (low certainty).
It is very uncertain whether transvaginal biological graft changes bladder function compared with native tissue repair (very low certainty).
Transvaginal biological graft showed no clear difference in painful intercourse ‐ de novo dyspareunia compared with native tissue repair (moderate certainty).
It is very uncertain whether transvaginal biological graft changes quality of life compared with native tissue repair (very low certainty).