The French Health Authorities' (HAS) report of November 2006 concluded that the use of mesh at the time of transvaginal repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) should be limited to clinical research. This review intends to analyse and comment the recent data on this topic. A review on PubMed, on a personal database and actualisation until May 2008 has been performed choosing French or English language series concerning prolapse surgery with mesh disposed by the vaginal route. It includes six randomised controlled trials comparing transvaginal repair of POP with or without mesh: four about cystocele, one about rectocele and one about apical prolapse. Both surgical techniques and recurrence criteria are poorly standardised. The four randomised trials focusing on cystocele repair support the anatomical superiority of techniques using mesh, with similar functional results with or without mesh reinforcement. In the other indications, the results remain unclear or controversial. According to the randomised trials, the complications rate, except mesh exposure, is similar with and without mesh. However there are some specific complications when using mesh, such as mesh infection, mesh exposure or shrinkage and visceral extrusion. We recommend using vaginal reinforcement mesh with specific care in selected patients and we suggest some guidelines to be proposed for consensus at concerned French scientific societies.