INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Long-term outcome data exist with Gynecare TVT tension-free support for incontinence (TVT), yet few comparisons have been made to newer retropubic sling delivery systems, especially with regards to urethrolysis for postoperative voiding dysfunction. Our objective was to compare the odds of urethrolysis for the treatment of voiding dysfunction between two retropubic sling systems. METHODS: We performed a case-control study comparing the risk of urethrolysis between TVT versus the Bard ALIGN Urethral Support System (Bard Align). We identified surgical procedures described as urethrolysis, sling revision, loosening, or lysis performed for the treatment of voiding dysfunction by urogynecologists at Duke University between January 2007 and June 2011. Slings placed at outside institutions were excluded. Controls were matched for both concomitant prolapse procedures and academic year. RESULTS: Of 818 total slings placed during the study period, there were 28 (3.4 %) urethrolysis cases, which were matched to 84 controls. Among urethrolysis cases, 6/28 (21.4 %) had received TVT, while 22/28 (78.6 %) had received Bard Align slings. Of the 84 matched controls, 30/84 (35.7 %) had undergone TVT and 54/84 (64.3 %) had undergone Bard Align. There was no significant difference in the odds of urethrolysis following the use of TVT or Bard Align [odds ratio (OR) 2.00, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.74-5.50]. In a conditional logistic regression model, which adjusted for age, body mass index, prior anti-incontinence or prolapse surgery, and postvoid residual, there remained no significant difference in odds of urethrolysis between the two sling types (OR 1.50, 95 % CI 0.42-5.33). CONCLUSIONS: Despite different instrument designs, there was no significant difference in the risk of urethrolysis following TVT or Bard Align retropubic sling.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Long-term outcome data exist with Gynecare TVT tension-free support for incontinence (TVT), yet few comparisons have been made to newer retropubic sling delivery systems, especially with regards to urethrolysis for postoperative voiding dysfunction. Our objective was to compare the odds of urethrolysis for the treatment of voiding dysfunction between two retropubic sling systems. METHODS: We performed a case-control study comparing the risk of urethrolysis between TVT versus the Bard ALIGN Urethral Support System (Bard Align). We identified surgical procedures described as urethrolysis, sling revision, loosening, or lysis performed for the treatment of voiding dysfunction by urogynecologists at Duke University between January 2007 and June 2011. Slings placed at outside institutions were excluded. Controls were matched for both concomitant prolapse procedures and academic year. RESULTS: Of 818 total slings placed during the study period, there were 28 (3.4 %) urethrolysis cases, which were matched to 84 controls. Among urethrolysis cases, 6/28 (21.4 %) had received TVT, while 22/28 (78.6 %) had received Bard Align slings. Of the 84 matched controls, 30/84 (35.7 %) had undergone TVT and 54/84 (64.3 %) had undergone Bard Align. There was no significant difference in the odds of urethrolysis following the use of TVT or Bard Align [odds ratio (OR) 2.00, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.74-5.50]. In a conditional logistic regression model, which adjusted for age, body mass index, prior anti-incontinence or prolapse surgery, and postvoid residual, there remained no significant difference in odds of urethrolysis between the two sling types (OR 1.50, 95 % CI 0.42-5.33). CONCLUSIONS: Despite different instrument designs, there was no significant difference in the risk of urethrolysis following TVT or Bard Align retropubic sling.
Authors: Harry A M Vervest; Tanya M Bisseling; A Peter M Heintz; Steven E Schraffordt Koops Journal: Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct Date: 2006-04-22
Authors: Elizabeth R Casiano; John B Gebhart; Michaela E McGree; Amy L Weaver; Christopher J Klingele; Emanuel C Trabuco Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2011-02-22 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Mary M T South; Jennifer M Wu; George D Webster; Alison C Weidner; Jennifer J Roelands; Cindy L Amundsen Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2009-02-27 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Jerry G Blaivas; Rajveer S Purohit; Matthew S Benedon; Gabriel Mekel; Michael Stern; Mubashir Billah; Kola Olugbade; Robert Bendavid; Vladimir Iakovlev Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2015-08-18 Impact factor: 14.432