PURPOSE: We reevaluated and brought up to date the 8-year followup of a previous published, randomized, controlled trial of the impact of Burch colposuspension as a prophylactic anti-incontinence procedure in patients without urinary incontinence who underwent abdominal pelvic organ prolapse repair. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 66 continent women with pelvic organ prolapse were randomly assigned to abdominal pelvic organ prolapse repair and concomitant Burch colposuspension in 34 (group 1) or pelvic organ prolapse repair alone without an anti-incontinence procedure in 32 (group 2). Primary study end points were the anatomical outcome and changes in incontinence status. Secondary end points were changes in subjective symptoms and quality of life. RESULTS: Median followup was 97 months (range 72 to 134). Three group 1 and 1 group 2 patients were lost to followup. Three group 1 patients had a stage I rectocele and 1 had a stage I cystocele. Four group 2 patients had a stage I rectocele and 3 had a stage I cystocele. Nine of 31 group 1 patients (29%) were incontinent compared with 5 of 31 (16%) in group 2 (p = 0.553). In group 1 all except 1 patient were successfully treated for voiding dysfunction. Storage symptoms had disappeared in 1 patient and de novo storage symptoms had developed in 2 since the previous followup. De novo incontinence developed in 2 group 2 patients after midterm outcomes were reported. Median Urogenital Distress Inventory-6 and Incontinence Impact on Quality of Life-7 scores were improved in all groups at last followup (p 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term results cast doubt on whether Burch colposuspension should be done during pelvic organ prolapse repair in continent women.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: We reevaluated and brought up to date the 8-year followup of a previous published, randomized, controlled trial of the impact of Burch colposuspension as a prophylactic anti-incontinence procedure in patients without urinary incontinence who underwent abdominal pelvic organ prolapse repair. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 66 continent women with pelvic organ prolapse were randomly assigned to abdominal pelvic organ prolapse repair and concomitant Burch colposuspension in 34 (group 1) or pelvic organ prolapse repair alone without an anti-incontinence procedure in 32 (group 2). Primary study end points were the anatomical outcome and changes in incontinence status. Secondary end points were changes in subjective symptoms and quality of life. RESULTS: Median followup was 97 months (range 72 to 134). Three group 1 and 1 group 2 patients were lost to followup. Three group 1 patients had a stage I rectocele and 1 had a stage I cystocele. Four group 2 patients had a stage I rectocele and 3 had a stage I cystocele. Nine of 31 group 1 patients (29%) were incontinent compared with 5 of 31 (16%) in group 2 (p = 0.553). In group 1 all except 1 patient were successfully treated for voiding dysfunction. Storage symptoms had disappeared in 1 patient and de novo storage symptoms had developed in 2 since the previous followup. De novo incontinence developed in 2 group 2 patients after midterm outcomes were reported. Median Urogenital Distress Inventory-6 and Incontinence Impact on Quality of Life-7 scores were improved in all groups at last followup (p 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term results cast doubt on whether Burch colposuspension should be done during pelvic organ prolapse repair in continent women.
Authors: Ingrid Nygaard; Linda Brubaker; Halina M Zyczynski; Geoffrey Cundiff; Holly Richter; Marie Gantz; Paul Fine; Shawn Menefee; Beri Ridgeway; Anthony Visco; Lauren Klein Warren; Min Zhang; Susan Meikle Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-05-15 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: J Marinus van der Ploeg; Katrien Oude Rengerink; Annemarie van der Steen; Jules H Schagen van Leeuwen; C Huub van der Vaart; Jan-Paul W R Roovers Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2016-01-06 Impact factor: 2.894