Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 8, 2026

Transvaginal Mesh Insertion in the Ovine Model
Published on: July 27, 2017
Mesh kits for anterior vaginal prolapse are not cost effective
Sunshine Murray1, Rashel M Haverkorn, Yair Lotan
1Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, Dallas, TX 75390-9110, USA. Sunshine.Murray@utsouthwestern.edu
Introduction And Hypothesis:
To analyze the cost-effectiveness of traditional anterior colporrhaphy (AC), hand-cut mesh, and mesh kit anterior vaginal prolapse (AVP) repair.
Methods:
A decision analysis model was built using mean operating room (OR) times, mesh extrusion rates, and recurrence rates obtained from a meta-analysis along with Medicare reimbursement for surgeon fees and office visits, and hospital costs of supplies, OR time, and room and board.
Results:
Non-kit mesh repair was $3,380, AC $3,461, and mesh kit $4,678. One-way sensitivity analyses demonstrated recurrence rate of AC would need to be 28% to be equally cost effective. Mesh kit repair did not reach cost equivalence even at 0 min OR time. Two-way sensitivity analysis comparing mesh extrusion and AC recurrence demonstrated AC is more cost effective if recurrence is <20% or extrusion >25%.
Conclusions:
Mesh kits for AVP repair are not cost effective, regardless of the OR time saved.
Related Concept Videos
Mitral Valve Prolapse II: Assessment and Management
Mitral Valve Prolapse I: Introduction
Mitral Valve Prolapse III: Nursing Management

