Predator egg-induced non-consumptive effects suppress spider mite survival and reproductive performance.

Obstructive defecation syndrome (ODS) is frequently associated with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and represents a complex manifestation of multicompartment pelvic floor dysfunction that substantially impairs quality of life [–]. In patients with persistent symptoms after failure of conservative treatment, surgical reconstruction of the pelvic floor is often required [–]. Interdisciplinary surgical strategies combining urogynecological and colorectal expertise allowing simultaneous correction of anterior, apical, and posterior compartments have gained acceptance and shown to be safe and effective, providing a standardized operative framework for the present comparative mesh-based study [–]. Synthetic meshes remain the standard material for sacrocolpopexy but are associated with relevant long-term complications, leading to regulatory warnings and persistent safety concerns, particularly in younger women [–]. Biologic meshes represent a resorbable alternative with favorable safety data in colorectal surgery [–]; their role in sacrocolpopexy, however, is unclear and it is currently not recommended in guidelines because of insufficient evidence []. Consequently, mesh selection in clinical practice is largely based on expert opinion and patient preference. This evidence gap provides the rationale for the present study comparing biologic and synthetic mesh materials in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy within an established interdisciplinary surgical framework. Using a randomized controlled design, the study focuses on mesh-related safety and clinical outcomes. To our knowledge, this is the first randomized study to systematically evaluate mesh material in this clinical context, aiming to provide an evidence base for future trials and patient-centered decision-making.