INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: We tested the hypothesis that the single-incision sling, TVT-Secur (TVT-S), placed in U position is not inferior to transobturator midurethral sling (TVT-O) for treating stress urinary incontinence (SUI). METHODS: This was a noninferiority, prospective, randomized controlled trial in which women with SUI, confirmed by physical and urodynamic evaluation, were randomly assigned to receive either TVT-O (n = 56) or TVT-S (n = 66). Exclusion criteria were voiding dysfunction, detrusor overactivity (DO), and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) beyond the hymen. The primary outcomes were objective and subjective cure rates, which were assessed at the 12-month follow-up visit, defined as negative stress, pad, and urodynamic tests and absence of self-reported SUI symptoms. Secondary outcomes were quality of life (QoL) by King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) validated for Portuguese language, postoperative pain, and complication rate. The power of the study was 80 % to test the hypothesis that TVT-S is not inferior to TVT-O by >15 %. Statistical significance was fixed at 5 % (p < 0.05). RESULTS: Groups were similar regarding demographic and clinical preoperative parameters. Objective cure rates for TVT-S andTVT-O groups were 84.1 % vs 87 % [90 % confidence interbal (CI) -15 to 9.8], and subjective cure rates were 92.1 % vs 90.7 % (95 % CI -11.4 to 6.7), respectively. TVT-S resulted in less postoperative general and thigh pain (p < 0.001). A few, but not statistically significant different complications, were observed in both groups: vaginal mucosa perforation, urinary retention, urinary infection, tape exposure, and de novo urgency. There was a significant improvement in all KHQ domains in both groups (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: TVT-S was not inferior to TVT-O for treating SUI at 12-month follow-up.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: We tested the hypothesis that the single-incision sling, TVT-Secur (TVT-S), placed in U position is not inferior to transobturator midurethral sling (TVT-O) for treating stress urinary incontinence (SUI). METHODS: This was a noninferiority, prospective, randomized controlled trial in which women with SUI, confirmed by physical and urodynamic evaluation, were randomly assigned to receive either TVT-O (n = 56) or TVT-S (n = 66). Exclusion criteria were voiding dysfunction, detrusor overactivity (DO), and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) beyond the hymen. The primary outcomes were objective and subjective cure rates, which were assessed at the 12-month follow-up visit, defined as negative stress, pad, and urodynamic tests and absence of self-reported SUI symptoms. Secondary outcomes were quality of life (QoL) by King's Health Questionnaire (KHQ) validated for Portuguese language, postoperative pain, and complication rate. The power of the study was 80 % to test the hypothesis that TVT-S is not inferior to TVT-O by >15 %. Statistical significance was fixed at 5 % (p < 0.05). RESULTS: Groups were similar regarding demographic and clinical preoperative parameters. Objective cure rates for TVT-S and TVT-O groups were 84.1 % vs 87 % [90 % confidence interbal (CI) -15 to 9.8], and subjective cure rates were 92.1 % vs 90.7 % (95 % CI -11.4 to 6.7), respectively. TVT-S resulted in less postoperative general and thigh pain (p < 0.001). A few, but not statistically significant different complications, were observed in both groups: vaginal mucosa perforation, urinary retention, urinary infection, tape exposure, and de novo urgency. There was a significant improvement in all KHQ domains in both groups (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION:TVT-S was not inferior to TVT-O for treating SUI at 12-month follow-up.
Authors: Piet Hinoul; Harry A M Vervest; Jan den Boon; Pieter L Venema; Marielle M Lakeman; Alfredo L Milani; Jan-Paul W R Roovers Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-02-22 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Burhan Coskun; Rebecca S Lavelle; Feras Alhalabi; Gary E Lemack; Philippe E Zimmern Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2014-10-23 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Annetta M Madsen; Sherif A El-Nashar; Joshua L Woelk; Christopher J Klingele; John B Gebhart; Emanuel C Trabuco Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2013-09-17 Impact factor: 2.894
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
Authors: Hyung Ho Lee; Dae Keun Kim; Jae Won Park; Suk Young Lee; Woo Jin Ko; Young Sig Kim Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2019-11-28 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Ana Maria H M Bianchi-Ferraro; Zsuzsanna I K Jarmy-DiBella; Rodrigo de Aquino Castro; Maria Augusta T Bortolini; Marair G F Sartori; Manoel J B C Girão Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2014-03-19 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Sue Ross; Selphee Tang; Jane Schulz; Magnus Murphy; Jose Goncalves; Stephen Kaye; Lorel Dederer; Magali Robert Journal: BMC Res Notes Date: 2014-12-22