Yi-Wen Tien1,2, Sheng-Mou Hsiao3, Chien-Nan Lee2, Ho-Hsiung Lin4. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chang-Hua Hospital, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Chang-Hua, Taiwan. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, National Taiwan University College of Medicine and National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 8 Chung-Shan South Road, Taipei, 100, Taiwan. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, Banqiao, New Taipei, Taiwan. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, National Taiwan University College of Medicine and National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 8 Chung-Shan South Road, Taipei, 100, Taiwan. hhlin@ntuh.gov.tw.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The impact of the IncontiLaseTM procedure on lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) remains unclear. Our aim was to evaluate the effects of the IncontiLaseTM procedure for urodynamic stress incontinence (USI). METHODS: All consecutive women with USI prospectively underwent the IncontiLaseTM procedure. Urodynamic studies, pad testing, LUTS, and sexual function questionnaires were assessed before and after treatment. RESULTS: Thirty-five women underwent the IncontiLaseTM procedure. Among the 28 women with baseline pad weights >1 g, 11 (39.3 %) were objectively cured and 11 (39.3 %) improved. Among the 18 women with mild USI (i.e., baseline pad weight 1-10 g), nine (50 %) were cured and five (27.8 %) improved. Among ten women with baseline pad weight >10 g, two (20 %) were cured and six (60 %) improved. Among the 32 women with complete questionnaire data at 6 months, seven (21.9 %) were subjectively cured, and four (12.5 %) improved. Regarding LUTS, the majority of domains on the King's Health Questionnaire and female sexual desire and function exhibited significant improvements. Forty percent (12/30) of the partners of these patients felt their sexual function had improved at 6 months. Nonetheless, urodynamic values did not differ across the timeline. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of the IncontiLaseTM procedure for mild USI was moderate at 6-month follow-up but was not effective for pad weight >10 g. Moreover, it improved LUTS, quality of life, QoL, and sexual function of both partners. Further studies should be performed to assess long-term sustained efficacy.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The impact of the IncontiLaseTM procedure on lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) remains unclear. Our aim was to evaluate the effects of the IncontiLaseTM procedure for urodynamic stress incontinence (USI). METHODS: All consecutive women with USI prospectively underwent the IncontiLaseTM procedure. Urodynamic studies, pad testing, LUTS, and sexual function questionnaires were assessed before and after treatment. RESULTS: Thirty-five women underwent the IncontiLaseTM procedure. Among the 28 women with baseline pad weights >1 g, 11 (39.3 %) were objectively cured and 11 (39.3 %) improved. Among the 18 women with mild USI (i.e., baseline pad weight 1-10 g), nine (50 %) were cured and five (27.8 %) improved. Among ten women with baseline pad weight >10 g, two (20 %) were cured and six (60 %) improved. Among the 32 women with complete questionnaire data at 6 months, seven (21.9 %) were subjectively cured, and four (12.5 %) improved. Regarding LUTS, the majority of domains on the King's Health Questionnaire and female sexual desire and function exhibited significant improvements. Forty percent (12/30) of the partners of these patients felt their sexual function had improved at 6 months. Nonetheless, urodynamic values did not differ across the timeline. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of the IncontiLaseTM procedure for mild USI was moderate at 6-month follow-up but was not effective for pad weight >10 g. Moreover, it improved LUTS, quality of life, QoL, and sexual function of both partners. Further studies should be performed to assess long-term sustained efficacy.
Entities:
Keywords:
Laser therapy; Physiological; Sexual dysfunction; Stress; Urinary incontinence; Urodynamics
Authors: Rodney A Appell; Gita Singh; Ira W Klimberg; Christopher Graham; Saad Juma; W Glen Wells; Angelo Kanellos; Sandra F Reilley Journal: Expert Rev Med Devices Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 3.166
Authors: Annabel Nixon; Shoshana Colman; Luann Sabounjian; Bobby Sandage; Ute E Schwiderski; David R Staskin; Norman Zinner Journal: J Urol Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Roger R Dmochowski; Mark Avon; James Ross; Jay M Cooper; Richard Kaplan; Beverly Love; NeeraJ Kohli; David Albala; Bruce Shingleton Journal: J Urol Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 7.450
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
Authors: Yona Tadir; Adrian Gaspar; Ahinoam Lev-Sagie; Macrene Alexiades; Red Alinsod; Alex Bader; Alberto Calligaro; Jorge A Elias; Marco Gambaciani; Jorge E Gaviria; Cheryl B Iglesia; Ksenija Selih-Martinec; Patricia L Mwesigwa; Urska B Ogrinc; Stefano Salvatore; Paolo Scollo; Nicola Zerbinati; John Stuart Nelson Journal: Lasers Surg Med Date: 2017-02-21 Impact factor: 4.025