Objectives. To compare the clinical and cost effectiveness of surgical treatments for the repair of anterior POP.
Methods. We conducted a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical treatments for women with POP. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was possible for anterior POP, same site recurrence outcome. A Markov model was used to compare the cost–utility of surgical treatments for the primary repair of anterior POP from a UK National Health Service perspective.
Main results. We identified 27 eligible trials for the NMA involving eight surgical treatments tested on 3,194 women. Synthetic mesh was the most effective in preventing recurrence at the same site. There was no evidence to suggest a difference between synthetic non-absorbable mesh, synthetic partially absorbable mesh, and biological mesh. The cost-utility analysis which incorporated effectiveness, complications, and cost data found non-mesh repair to have the highest probability of being cost-effective. The conclusions were robust to model inputs including effectiveness, costs, and utility values.
Conclusions. Anterior colporrhaphy augmented with mesh appeared to be cost-ineffective in women requiring primary repair of anterior POP. There is a need for further research on long-term effectiveness and the safety of mesh products to establish their relative cost-effectiveness with a greater certainty.
|Number of pages||24|
|Journal||BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology|
|Early online date||20 Sep 2019|
|Publication status||E-pub ahead of print - 20 Sep 2019|
- pelvic organ prolapse
- anterior prolapse
- network meta-analysis
- outcome research
- National Institute of Health and Care Excellence