| Literature DB >> 26861984 |
Nikola Fistonić1, Ivan Fistonić2, Štefica Findri Guštek2, Iva Sorta Bilajac Turina3, Ingrid Marton4, Zdenko Vižintin5, Marko Kažič5, Irena Hreljac6, Tadej Perhavec5, Matjaž Lukač5.
Abstract
The study presents an assessment of mechanism of action and a pilot clinical study of efficacy and safety of the Er:YAG laser for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The subject of this study is a treatment of SUI with a 2940 nm Er:YAG laser, operating in a special SMOOTH mode designed to increase temperature of the vaginal mucosa up to maximally 60-65 °C without ablating the epidermis. Numerical modelling of the temperature distribution within mucosa tissue following an irradiation with the SMOOTH mode Er:YAG laser was performed in order to determine the appropriate range of laser parameters. The laser treatment parameters were further confirmed by measuring in vivo temperatures of the vaginal mucosa using a thermal camera. To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of the SMOOTH mode Er:YAG laser SUI treatment, a pilot clinical study was performed. The study recruited 31 female patients suffering from SUI. Follow-ups were scheduled at 1, 2, and 6 months post treatment. ICIQ-UI questionnaires were collected as a primary trial endpoint. Secondary endpoints included perineometry and residual urine volume measurements at baseline and all follow-ups. Thermal camera measurements have shown the optimal increase in temperature of the vaginal mucosa following treatment of SUI with a SMOOTH mode Er:YAG laser. Primary endpoint, the change in ICIQ-UI score, showed clinically relevant and statistically significant improvement after all follow-ups compared to baseline scores. There was also improvement in the secondary endpoints. Only mild and transient adverse events and no serious adverse events were reported. The results indicate that non-ablative Er:YAG laser therapy is a promising minimally invasive non-surgical option for treating women with SUI symptoms.Entities:
Keywords: Er:YAG laser; Minimally invasive SUI therapy; Stress urinary incontinence
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26861984 PMCID: PMC4851697 DOI: 10.1007/s10103-016-1884-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Lasers Med Sci ISSN: 0268-8921 Impact factor: 3.161
Fig 1a Calculated temperature on the tissue surface following laser treatment with the PS03 handpiece for two different SMOOTH mode fluences (6 and 10 J/cm2) and with the R11 handpiece (fluence = 3 J/cm2), as a function of the number of consecutively delivered SMOOTH mode pulses. b Calculated normalized temperature change distribution in relation to depth below tissue surface following laser irradiation as a function of the number of consecutively delivered SMOOTH mode Er:YAG pulses using the handpiece PS03 at a SMOOTH mode pulse fluence of 10 J/cm2
Fig. 2a An example of the measured temperature development on the introitus mucous tissue during four consecutively delivered SMOOTH mode Er:YAG (Fotona Dynamis XS) laser pulses (PS03 handpiece, SMOOTH mode pulse fluence: 3 J/cm2, total fluence delivered: 4 × 3 J/cm2 = 12 J/cm2). b Measured temperature on the introitus mucosa following laser treatment with the PS03 handpiece for two different SMOOTH mode fluences (6 and 10 J/cm2) and with the R11 handpiece (fluence = 3 J/cm2), as a function of the number of consecutively delivered SMOOTH mode pulses
All patients’ characteristics at the baseline and baseline characteristics of those who remained into the study at the 1st and at the 2nd and 3rd follow-up
| Baseline | 1st follow-up | 2nd follow-up | 3rd follow-up | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 46.8 ± 9.1 | 46.8 ± 9.1 | 46.4 ± 9 | 46.7 ± 7.2 |
| Parity | 2 (1.7–3) | 2 (1.7–3) | 2 (2–3) | 2 (1–3) |
| Average birth weight (kg) | 3.5 ± 0.5 | 3.5 ± 0.5 | 3.5 ± 0.6 | 3.5 ± 0.5 |
| BMI | 23.3 ± 2.7 | 23.3 ± 2.7 | 23.8 ± 3.2 | 24.14 ± 3 |
| BMI, | ||||
| Normal (≤24.9) | 23 (74.2) | 23 (74.2) | 10 (58.8) | 8 (57.1) |
| Overweight (25.0–29.9) | 8 (25.8) | 8 (25.8) | 7 (41.2) | 6 (42.9) |
| Obese (≥30.0) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 31 (100) | 31 (100) | 17 (100) | 14 (100) |
| ICIQ-UI | 12.9 ± 5 | 12.9 ± 5 | 12.5 ± 4.7 | 14 ± 3.7 |
| Residual urine | 3.8 (1.1–10.5) | 3.8 (1.1–10.5) | 3 (1.9–9.9) | 5.6 (1.4–13) |
| Perineometry | ||||
| Maximal (mmHg) | 9 (7.5–11.9) | 9 (7.5–11.9) | 9.7 (7.6–12.2) | 8.4 (7.6–12.1) |
| Average (mmHg) | 4.6 (3.8–6.4) | 4.6 (3.8–6.4) | 5.2 (3.9–6.7) | 4.6 (4–6.2) |
| Duration (seconds) | 10.7 (5.6–23.9) | 10.7 (5.6–23.9) | 10 (6.1–21.7) | 10.4 (6.1–21.7) |
Data are presented as medians (intra-quartile range), means ± SD, depending on the normality of the data, or n (%), where patient distributions were calculated
BMI body mass index (body weight in kg divided by body height in m2)
Fig. 3Mean scores from the ICIQ-UI questionnaire, which was the primary effectiveness endpoint, at baseline, and at 1, 2, and 6 months after treatment. Circles represent all patients that have participated in the measurement at each follow-up. * comparison test—***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05
Differences from baseline before the intervention, at 1st, 2nd, and 6th month follow-up
| Baseline ( | 1-month follow-up ( | 2-month follow-up ( | 6-month follow-up ( | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| AD |
| AD |
| AD | |||||
| ICIQ-UI | 12.9 ± 5 | 6.6 ± 6.1*** | <0.001 | −6.3 | 7.6 ± 6.7** | 0.005 | −5.3 | 7.8 ± 5.7* | 0.01 | −5.1 |
| Residual urine | 3.8 (1.1–10.5) | 0.6 (0.1–3.3)* | 0.01 | −3.2 | 0.4 (0.2–3.7)* | 0.04 | −3.4 | 1.0 (0.2–3.3) | 0.07 | −2.8 |
| Perineometry | ||||||||||
| Maximal (mmHg) | 9 (7.5–11.9) | 11 (8.5–16.4) | 0.36 | 2 | 12.2 (9.9–24.8) | 0.06 | 3.2 | 11.5 (9.7–21) | 0.18 | 2.5 |
| Average (mmHg) | 4.6 (3.8–6.4) | 6 (4.7–9.5) | 0.12 | 1.4 | 6 (4.5–15.2) | 0.16 | 1.4 | 5.7 (4.5–14.7) | 0.18 | 1.1 |
| Duration (seconds) | 10.7 (5.6–23.9) | 15.4 (9.3–28.9) | 0.75 | 4.7 | 29 (11.2–32.7) | 0.15 | 18.3 | 27 (10.5–46) | 0.09 | 16.3 |
Data are presented as mean ± SD or medians (interquartile ranges), depending on the normality of the data
P P value (one-way ANOVA, multiple comparison; or Kruskal-Wallis test, depending on the normality of the datasets), AD absolute difference in medians at baseline and follow-up, * indicates statistical significance
***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05
Sensitivity analysis. Differences from baseline before the intervention, at 1st, 2nd, and 6th month follow-up under the assumption that the 2nd and 6th months follow-up values for all those that were lost for follow-up were the same as at last measured follow-up
| Baseline ( | 1-month follow-up ( | 2-month follow-up ( | 6-month follow-up ( | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| AD |
| AD |
| AD | |||||
| ICIQ-UI | 12.9 ± 5 | 6.6 ± 6.1*** | <0.001 | −6.3 | 6.9 ± 6.3*** | <0.001 | −5.3 | 7 ± 6*** | <0.001 | −5.9 |
| Residual urine | 3.8 (1.1–10.5) | 0.6 (0.1–3.3)* | 0.02 | −3.2 | 0.8 (0.25–3.6)* | 0.03 | −3.4 | 1.0 (0.2–3.5)** | 0.007 | −2.8 |
| Perineometry | ||||||||||
| Maximal (mmHg) | 9 (7.5–11.9) | 11 (8.5–16.4) | 0.19 | 2 | 11.5 (10.1–20.2)* | 0.02 | 2.5 | 12 (9.7–40)* | 0.02 | 3 |
| Average (mmHg) | 4.6 (3.8–6.4) | 6 (4.7–9.5) | 0.06 | 1.4 | 6.1 (4.6–11.9)* | 0.02 | 1.5 | 5.8 | 0.03 | 1.2 |
| Duration (seconds) | 10.7 (5.6–23.9) | 15.4 (9.3–28.9) | 0.4 | 4.7 | 18.5 (9.5–29.8) | 0.2 | 7.8 | 16.2 (10.5–36.2) | 0.09 | 5.5 |
Data are presented as mean ± SD or medians (interquartile ranges), depending on the normality of the data
P one-way ANOVA, Dunn’s multiple comparison test, statistical significance between baseline and follow-up, AD absolute difference in medians between baseline and follow up, * indicates statistical significance
***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05