Introduction and hypothesisPolypropylene is a material that is commonly used to treat pelvic floor conditions such as pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Owing to the nature of complications experienced by some patients implanted with either incontinence or prolapse meshes, the biocompatibility of polypropylene has recently been questioned. This literature review considers the in vivo response to polypropylene following implantation in animal models. The specific areas explored in this review are material selection, impact of anatomical location, and the structure, weight and size of polypropylene mesh types.MethodsAll relevant abstracts from original articles investigating the host response of mesh in vivo were reviewed. Papers were obtained and categorised into various mesh material types: polypropylene, polypropylene composites, and other synthetic and biologically derived mesh.ResultsPolypropylene mesh fared well in comparison with other material types in terms of host response. It was found that a lightweight, large-pore mesh is the most appropriate structure.ConclusionThe evidence reviewed shows that polypropylene evokes a less inflammatory or similar host response when compared with other materials used in mesh devices.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00192-016-3029-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users