Anterior vaginal wall prolapse

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation carried a 5.9% 5-year risk of surgery for mesh complications (vs 0.7% in native tissue, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 8.21, 95%CI 6.31-10.67), with the risk increasing over calendar

Effect: adverse; HR 8.21; CI: 95%CI 6.31, 10.67

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46

Vaginal mesh augmentation for anterior prolapse was associated with a significantly higher 5-year risk of any repeat surgery compared with native tissue repair (15.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR 1.

Effect: adverse; HR 1.33; CI: 95%CI 1.20, 1.46