INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP) provides an objective assessment of urethral integrity, but its role in predicting outcome after midurethral sling (MUS) placement is debatable and current practice in the UK is variable. The study was carried out to determine if lower preoperative MUCP is associated with poor outcome following MUS. METHOD: The study was a retrospective review of the British Society of Urogynaecology (BSUG) database and urodynamics (UDS) data. Patients who reported outcome as "no improvement", "worse" or "much worse" on the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGII) scale were identified as having a poor outcome. Patients who reported "a little improvement", "improved" and "very much improved" on the PGII were thought to have a good outcome. The preoperative demographics, UDS findings and quality of life (International Consultation of Incontinence questionnaires [ICIQ-SF]) data of the two groups were compared. RESULT: A total of 236 women were identified for the study. Of these, 24 women (10.2 %) had a poor outcome. Of the remaining women reporting a good outcome, 50 cases were randomly selected. All urodynamic parameters, including mean functional urethral length (FUL), bladder capacity, and Qmax, were similar, except for mean MUCP 37.05 cm H2O, which was significantly lower in group 1 (poor outcome 37.05 cm H2O) compared with a mean MUCP of 50.6 cm H2O in group 2 (good outcome; p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: We conclude that failure following MUS is associated with preoperatively lower MUCP, which can be used as a predictor of failure.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP) provides an objective assessment of urethral integrity, but its role in predicting outcome after midurethral sling (MUS) placement is debatable and current practice in the UK is variable. The study was carried out to determine if lower preoperative MUCP is associated with poor outcome following MUS. METHOD: The study was a retrospective review of the British Society of Urogynaecology (BSUG) database and urodynamics (UDS) data. Patients who reported outcome as "no improvement", "worse" or "much worse" on the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGII) scale were identified as having a poor outcome. Patients who reported "a little improvement", "improved" and "very much improved" on the PGII were thought to have a good outcome. The preoperative demographics, UDS findings and quality of life (International Consultation of Incontinence questionnaires [ICIQ-SF]) data of the two groups were compared. RESULT: A total of 236 women were identified for the study. Of these, 24 women (10.2 %) had a poor outcome. Of the remaining women reporting a good outcome, 50 cases were randomly selected. All urodynamic parameters, including mean functional urethral length (FUL), bladder capacity, and Qmax, were similar, except for mean MUCP 37.05 cm H2O, which was significantly lower in group 1 (poor outcome 37.05 cm H2O) compared with a mean MUCP of 50.6 cm H2O in group 2 (good outcome; p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: We conclude that failure following MUS is associated with preoperatively lower MUCP, which can be used as a predictor of failure.
Entities:
Keywords:
Maximum urethral closure pressure; Midurethral slings; Stress incontinence
Authors: Giacomo Novara; Walter Artibani; Matthew D Barber; Christopher R Chapple; Elisabetta Costantini; Vincenzo Ficarra; Paul Hilton; Carl G Nilsson; David Waltregny Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2010-04-23 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Charles W Nager; Larry Sirls; Heather J Litman; Holly Richter; Ingrid Nygaard; Toby Chai; Stephen Kraus; Halina Zyczynski; Kim Kenton; Liyuan Huang; John Kusek; Gary Lemack Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-06-16 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Kobi Stav; Peter L Dwyer; Anna Rosamilia; Lore Schierlitz; Yik N Lim; Joseph Lee Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2009-10-24 Impact factor: 2.894