Abstract:Objectives To detail the history of synthetic mid‐urethral slings (SMUSs) and fascial slings, their efficacy, associated complications, and changes to practice that have occurred after the issuing of the 2011 US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Safety Communication statement on transvaginal mesh (TVM), and to highlight the need for surgical registries and high‐quality randomised controlled data to guide recommendations for continence procedures, in view of current concerns regarding mesh. Methods A literature search was conducted in EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Database of systematic reviews to identify articles published from 2011 onward, following the FDA Safety Communication regarding TVM. Results Prior to the formal FDA Safety Communication in 2011, TVM was considered a safe option for the treatment of both pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The 2011 FDA safety communications and ensuing widely publicised litigation against TVM manufacturers have shifted both surgeon and patient acceptance of mesh products. Several efforts by medical and government bodies have been made to establish ways to monitor the surgical outcomes and safety of mesh products. The Australasian Pelvic Floor Procedure Registry is one such example. Although SMUSs have a long and established safety profile, perceptions of mesh products for SUI have also been negatively affected. The extent of this, however, has yet to be adequately measured through qualitative and quantitative data. The available data suggest it has been difficult for patients and consumers to distinguish between TVM morbidity for POP vs SUI. Furthermore, there remains a lack of high‐quality randomised or real‐world registry data to definitively exclude the SMUS from the SUI treatment algorithm. Since SMUSs are a viable option for SUI treatment, the concept of a 'post‐mesh world' remains contentious. Conclusion Controversies surrounding SMUSs have changed the treatment landscape of SUI. Against the background of significant litigious action following the FDA warnings against mesh use, there has been significant reduction in the uptake of synthetic mesh products. Although there are ample data related to surgical outcomes and safety for both autologous fascial and retropubic SMUSs in carefully selected patients, informed consent and surgical training will be of paramount importance as newer synthetic materials reach clinical maturity.

Recent advances in pelvic floor repair

Where are we in 2024 in the development of materials for surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence?

Complications related to use of mesh implants in surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse: infection or inflammation?

Risk Factors and Countermeasures of Stress Urinary Incontinence after Mesh Implantation for Patients with Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Managing female stress urinary incontinence in a post mesh era: What to do and when to refer

Perspectives on technology: urethral slings in a post‐mesh world

Tissue engineering in female pelvic floor reconstruction

Host–biomaterial interactions in mesh complications after pelvic floor reconstructive surgery

Current treatments for female pelvic floor dysfunctions

Long-term treatment outcomes of transvaginal mesh surgery versus anterior-posterior colporrhaphy for pelvic organ prolapse.

Transvaginal mesh: a historical review and update of the current state of affairs in the United States

The Clinical Efficacy Of Biologic Mesh And Synthetic Mesh For Pelvic Floor Reconstructive Surgery

Trends and focal points in pelvic floor reconstruction for pelvic organ prolapse: A bibliometric analysis

The long‐term impact of vaginal surgical mesh devices on pain clinic and psychological service referrals, anti‐inflammatory testing and pelvic scans in UK primary care: A cohort study with the Clinical Practice Research Datalink

Porcine Small Intestinal Submucosa Mesh for Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapsed.

Analysis of British Columbia practice patterns in the management of female stress urinary incontinence with emphasis on mesh use

Natural electrospun scaffold fabrication as an alternative to surgical mesh for stress urinary incontinence

The double-edged sword of mesh use in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a case report

Long‐term Treatment Outcomes of Transvaginal Mesh Surgery Versus Anterior–posterior Colporrhaphy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Finite element analysis of female pelvic organ prolapse mechanism: current landscape and future opportunities