Objectives: to assess the effectiveness of laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures vs mesh in individuals with stress urine incontinence. Methods: 50 patients were split into two groups. The 1st group consisted of 25 patients treated with sutures and the 2nd group consisted of 25 patients treated with mesh; both groups were identified with real stress incontinence using history, physical examination, direct observation, and/or cystometry. At this time, the diagnosis was made based on a history of leakage while coughing, laughing, sneezing, or engaging in strenuous exercise. All of the patients had a hypermobile urethra, as shown by the Q-tip test, which we defined as a more than 60-degree shift with Valsalva. Excluding patients with urge incontinence.A nurse (KS) contacted patients by telephone and asked just one subjective question: "Are you dry, better, or not improved?" Twelve months after surgery, all patients were accessible for examination. pertaining to the first group treated by sutures (25 patients) 19 of them were dry (76 percent), 3 were improved (12 percent), and 3 were not improved (12 percent). Regarding the second mesh-treated group (25 patients), 17 (68 percent) were dry, 3 (12 percent) were better, and 5 (20 percent) were not improved. Patients' outcomes with sutures in laparoscopic colposuspension were similar to those with mesh and staples in terms of success rate, surgical time, hospitalisation length, and post-operative problems.