INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of in situ vaginal wall sling operations in the late follow-up period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In situ vaginal wall sling procedure was performed in 203 women with type II stress urinary incontinence between 1996 and 2003. Of these 203 patients, 105, 64 and 23 of them completed 3, 4 and 5 years follow-up evaluations, respectively, and were included in the study. Preoperative evaluations included physical examination, Bonney and Q-Tip tests, cystoscopic examination, and filing and voiding cystometry with pressure flow studies followed by abdominal leak point measurements. RESULTS: The cure, improvement and failure rates were found to be 80.9, 2.9 and 16.2% after 3 years follow-up, 65.7, 10.9 and 23.4% after 4 years follow-up and 60.8, 8.7 and 30.4% after 5 years follow-up. Temporary retention (21.6%), suture granuloma (2.9%) and pelvic pain (1.9%) were some of the complications we met following surgery. CONCLUSION: We observed a yearly trend of decrease in efficacy.
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of in situ vaginal wall sling operations in the late follow-up period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In situ vaginal wall sling procedure was performed in 203 women with type II stress urinary incontinence between 1996 and 2003. Of these 203 patients, 105, 64 and 23 of them completed 3, 4 and 5 years follow-up evaluations, respectively, and were included in the study. Preoperative evaluations included physical examination, Bonney and Q-Tip tests, cystoscopic examination, and filing and voiding cystometry with pressure flow studies followed by abdominal leak point measurements. RESULTS: The cure, improvement and failure rates were found to be 80.9, 2.9 and 16.2% after 3 years follow-up, 65.7, 10.9 and 23.4% after 4 years follow-up and 60.8, 8.7 and 30.4% after 5 years follow-up. Temporary retention (21.6%), suture granuloma (2.9%) and pelvic pain (1.9%) were some of the complications we met following surgery. CONCLUSION: We observed a yearly trend of decrease in efficacy.
Authors: Ananias C Diokno; Manuel S Ocampo; Ibrahim A Ibrahim; Cindy R Karl; Michelle J Lajiness; Susan A Hall Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2009-08-22 Impact factor: 2.370