Mou-Jong Sun1, Ryan Sun, Yi-Ing Li. 1. Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center for Urinary Incontinence and Voiding Dysfunction, Changhua Christian Hospital, No.135, Nanxiao Street, Changhua City, Changhua County, 500, Taiwan. 13212@cch.org.tw
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In this retrospective study, a comparison is made of the clinical efficacy of two stress urinary incontinence treatment apparatuses, a single-incision sling and a transobturator sling. METHODS: Eighty-five (single-incision n=43, transobturator n=42) consecutive patients were included in this study. Clinical outcomes were assessed by the cough stress test (CST), the pad test, the Impact Questionnaire-Short Form (IIQ-7), the Urogenital Distress Inventory six-item questionnaire (UDI-6), the Sexual Questionnaire-SF (PIS-Q), the pain score, and the postoperative changes in urodynamic parameters. A comparison of the 1-year follow-up data is presented. RESULTS: Three months post-surgery, 81.8% of the single-incision sling group and 74.4% of the transobturator sling group had a negative cough test and a dry pad test. One year after surgery, significantly decreasing UDI-6, IIQ-7, and increasing PIS-Q scores were observed in both groups, while the complication rates remained similar. Postoperatively, the single-incision sling group seems to show a greater improvement in UDI-6 score, require less operation time, and experience less blood loss, less postoperative pain, and a smaller decrease in maximal urethral closure pressure (MUCP). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the single-incision sling and the transobturator sling are equally as effective and safe for the treatment of stress incontinence, as evaluated during the 1-year follow-up. The insertion of a single-incision sling seems to be less painful than that of a conventional sling. One year after surgery, the MUCP and mean flow rate of the transobturator sling group had significantly decreased compared with that of the single-incision sling group.
INTRODUCTION: In this retrospective study, a comparison is made of the clinical efficacy of two stress urinary incontinence treatment apparatuses, a single-incision sling and a transobturator sling. METHODS: Eighty-five (single-incision n=43, transobturator n=42) consecutive patients were included in this study. Clinical outcomes were assessed by the cough stress test (CST), the pad test, the Impact Questionnaire-Short Form (IIQ-7), the Urogenital Distress Inventory six-item questionnaire (UDI-6), the Sexual Questionnaire-SF (PIS-Q), the pain score, and the postoperative changes in urodynamic parameters. A comparison of the 1-year follow-up data is presented. RESULTS: Three months post-surgery, 81.8% of the single-incision sling group and 74.4% of the transobturator sling group had a negative cough test and a dry pad test. One year after surgery, significantly decreasing UDI-6, IIQ-7, and increasing PIS-Q scores were observed in both groups, while the complication rates remained similar. Postoperatively, the single-incision sling group seems to show a greater improvement in UDI-6 score, require less operation time, and experience less blood loss, less postoperative pain, and a smaller decrease in maximal urethral closure pressure (MUCP). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the single-incision sling and the transobturator sling are equally as effective and safe for the treatment of stress incontinence, as evaluated during the 1-year follow-up. The insertion of a single-incision sling seems to be less painful than that of a conventional sling. One year after surgery, the MUCP and mean flow rate of the transobturator sling group had significantly decreased compared with that of the single-incision sling group.
Authors: Bernard T Haylen; Dirk de Ridder; Robert M Freeman; Steven E Swift; Bary Berghmans; Joseph Lee; Ash Monga; Eckhard Petri; Diaa E Rizk; Peter K Sand; Gabriel N Schaer Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2009-11-25 Impact factor: 2.894