Importance Although anatomic level of mesh attachment to the sacrum varied during minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy with a large proportion above S1, this was not associated with pelvic organ prolapse recurrence. Objective This study aimed to describe the anatomic level of sacral mesh attachment and its association with prolapse recurrence after minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy. Study Design This study included a retrospective cohort of women who underwent minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy with subsequent abdominal and pelvic imaging (magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography) between 2010 and 2019 at a single academic institution. Anatomic level of attachment was determined by a radiologist. Prolapse recurrence was defined as a composite of self-reported bulge symptoms, any prolapse measure beyond the hymen, and any retreatment with pessary or surgery. χ 2 Tests were used for comparative outcomes. Results Analyses included 212 women. The mean ± SD age was 58.8 ± 9.9 years, the majority have preoperative stage III/IV prolapse (81.1%), and the median follow-up was 269 days (interquartile range, 57-825 days). Mesh was attached using titanium tacks (n = 136 [64.2%]) and suture (n = 76 [35.8%]) at the level of the L5-S1 intervertebral space (n = 113 [53.3%]) or overlying S1 (n = 89 [42.0%]).The surgical approach was significantly associated with attachment location with a greater proportion of laparoscopy cases demonstrating mesh attachment above S1 (85 [62.5%] vs robotically, 30 [39.5%]; P < 0.01). Dichotomized level of attachment was not associated with composite prolapse recurrence (above S1, n = 18 [22.2%] vs below S1, n = 24 [24.7%]; P = 0.69) or any compartment recurrence ( P ≥ 0.36). Conclusions Mesh was primarily attached to the anterior longitudinal ligament at the level of the L5-S1 intervertebral space or S1. Level of mesh attachment was not associated with composite prolapse recurrence.