OBJECTIVE: To evaluate 1- and 2-year urinary continence rates after Burch retropubic urethropexy compared with a retropubic midurethral sling for women with urinary incontinence undergoing sacrocolpopexy. METHODS: We conducted a planned secondary analysis of a multicenter, randomized, single-blind trial comparing Burch with a sling that enrolled participants from June 2009 to August 2013. Objective outcome measures of continence were assessed at 1- and 2-year follow-up through office visits and validated questionnaires. Overall continence was defined as a negative stress test, no retreatment for stress incontinence, and no self-reported urinary incontinence (International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire, Short Form, score, 0). Stress-specific continence was defined as fulfillment of the first two criteria and no self-reported stress-related incontinence. Primary outcomes were assessed with intention-to-treat and within-protocol analyses. Comparisons between groups were evaluated using χ or Fisher exact test. RESULTS: The two groups were similar in all measured baseline features. Outcome assessments at 2 years were available for 48 of 57 patients (84%) in the sling group and 45 of 56 patients (80%) in the Burch group. With intention-to-treat analysis, the sling group had significantly higher rates of overall continence than the Burch group (49% [28/57] vs 29% [16/56]; 95% CI for absolute risk difference 3.0-38.1; P=.03) at 1- but not 2-year follow-up (47% [27/57] vs 32% [18/56]; 95% CI for absolute risk difference -2.6 to 33.1; P=.10). The sling group had significantly higher rates of stress-specific continence than the Burch group at 1-year (70% [40/57] vs 46% [26/56]; 95% CI for absolute risk difference 6.1-41.4; P=.01) and 2-year (70% [40/57] vs 45% [25/56]; 95% CI for absolute risk difference 7.9-43.2; P=.006) follow-up. No difference was detected in prolapse recurrence, voiding dysfunction, antimuscarinic medication use, urgency incontinence, or patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Among women with baseline urinary incontinence undergoingsacrocolpopexy, the retropubic midurethral sling resulted in higher stress-specific continence rates than Burch retropubic urethropexy at 1- and 2-year follow-up.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate 1- and 2-year urinary continence rates after Burch retropubic urethropexy compared with a retropubic midurethral sling for women with urinary incontinence undergoing sacrocolpopexy. METHODS: We conducted a planned secondary analysis of a multicenter, randomized, single-blind trial comparing Burch with a sling that enrolled participants from June 2009 to August 2013. Objective outcome measures of continence were assessed at 1- and 2-year follow-up through office visits and validated questionnaires. Overall continence was defined as a negative stress test, no retreatment for stress incontinence, and no self-reported urinary incontinence (International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire, Short Form, score, 0). Stress-specific continence was defined as fulfillment of the first two criteria and no self-reported stress-related incontinence. Primary outcomes were assessed with intention-to-treat and within-protocol analyses. Comparisons between groups were evaluated using χ or Fisher exact test. RESULTS: The two groups were similar in all measured baseline features. Outcome assessments at 2 years were available for 48 of 57 patients (84%) in the sling group and 45 of 56 patients (80%) in the Burch group. With intention-to-treat analysis, the sling group had significantly higher rates of overall continence than the Burch group (49% [28/57] vs 29% [16/56]; 95% CI for absolute risk difference 3.0-38.1; P=.03) at 1- but not 2-year follow-up (47% [27/57] vs 32% [18/56]; 95% CI for absolute risk difference -2.6 to 33.1; P=.10). The sling group had significantly higher rates of stress-specific continence than the Burch group at 1-year (70% [40/57] vs 46% [26/56]; 95% CI for absolute risk difference 6.1-41.4; P=.01) and 2-year (70% [40/57] vs 45% [25/56]; 95% CI for absolute risk difference 7.9-43.2; P=.006) follow-up. No difference was detected in prolapse recurrence, voiding dysfunction, antimuscarinic medication use, urgency incontinence, or patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Among women with baseline urinary incontinence undergoing sacrocolpopexy, the retropubic midurethral sling resulted in higher stress-specific continence rates than Burch retropubic urethropexy at 1- and 2-year follow-up.
Authors: R C Bump; A Mattiasson; K Bø; L P Brubaker; J O DeLancey; P Klarskov; B L Shull; A R Smith Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 1996-07 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: L Brubaker; H E Richter; P A Norton; M Albo; H M Zyczynski; T C Chai; P Zimmern; S Kraus; L Sirls; J W Kusek; A Stoddard; S Tennstedt; E Ann Gormley Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-02-15 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jennifer M Wu; Catherine A Matthews; Mitchell M Conover; Virginia Pate; Michele Jonsson Funk Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Michael E Albo; Holly E Richter; Linda Brubaker; Peggy Norton; Stephen R Kraus; Philippe E Zimmern; Toby C Chai; Halina Zyczynski; Ananias C Diokno; Sharon Tennstedt; Charles Nager; L Keith Lloyd; MaryPat FitzGerald; Gary E Lemack; Harry W Johnson; Wendy Leng; Veronica Mallett; Anne M Stoddard; Shawn Menefee; R Edward Varner; Kimberly Kenton; Pam Moalli; Larry Sirls; Kimberly J Dandreo; John W Kusek; Leroy M Nyberg; William Steers Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-05-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Christopher F Maher; Aymen M Qatawneh; Peter L Dwyer; Marcus P Carey; Ann Cornish; Philip J Schluter Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Michael E Albo; Heather J Litman; Holly E Richter; Gary E Lemack; Larry T Sirls; Toby C Chai; Peggy Norton; Stephen R Kraus; Halina Zyczynski; Kimberly Kenton; E Ann Gormley; John W Kusek Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-10-22 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Marissa L Bonus; Douglas Luchristt; Oluwateniola Brown; Sarah Collins; Kimberly Kenton; C Emi Bretschneider Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2022-01-14 Impact factor: 1.932