Editorial comment

摘要

Mesh use in the surgical repair of prolapse has become a polarizing issue as administration attempts to place all mesh under the same umbrella. This article, through the use of an extensive database, explores and adds valuable information regarding the controversial and contentious topic of when to use mesh for the fixation of urogenital prolapse.As shown in this article, there has been a migration toward mesh over the last 10 years with 20% of patients receiving mesh for prolapse repairs in 2008. The authors attempted to discover if this came at the detriment of patient care. They demonstrated a lower reoperation rate when mesh was used for prolapse repair (4% vs 7%), although the use of mesh came "at the expense of pelvic pain, retention, mesh-related complications, and mesh removal" in the authors opinion.