Jocelyn J Fitzgerald1, Alex Soriano2, Joseph Panza3, Tanya P Hoke4, Shweta P Desai5, Amanda M Artsen6, Sarah E Andiman7, Danielle D Antosh5, Robert E Gutman1. 1. From the Department Obstetrics and Gynecology, Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC. 2. Department Obstetrics and Gynecology, Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 3. Department Obstetrics and Gynecology, Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN. 4. Department Obstetrics and Gynecology, Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL. 5. Department Obstetrics and Gynecology, Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Houston Methodist University, Houston, TX. 6. Department Obstetrics and Gynecology, Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Magee-Womens Hospital, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. 7. Department Obstetrics and Gynecology, Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Mt. Sinai Icahn School of Medicine, New York, NY.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite large trials designed to guide management on whether to perform a prophylactic continence procedure at the time of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair, it remains unclear if a staged or interval approach confers advantages in treatment of bothersome stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in women without bothersome SUI before their POP repair. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare success of concomitant versus interval slings for the prevention/treatment of de novo bothersome SUI after POP repair. STUDY DESIGN: This multicenter retrospective cohort with prospective follow-up enrolled women with minimal or no SUI symptoms who underwent minimally invasive apical surgery for stage 2 or higher POP between 2011 and 2018 and had a concomitant sling placed at the time of POP surgery or an interval sling placed. Prospectively, all patients were administered the Urogenital Distress Inventory Short-Form 6, the Patient Global Impression of Improvement, and questions on reoperation/retreatment and complications. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients had concomitant slings, and 60 had interval slings. There were no differences in the proportion of patients who had intrinsic sphincter deficiency (22% vs 20%), although the concomitant sling group was more likely to have a positive cough stress test result (30% vs 8%, P = 0.006). The interval sling group was more likely to report "yes" to SUI symptoms on Urogenital Distress Inventory Short-Form 6 (3% vs 30%, P = 0.0006) and during their postoperative visit (0% vs 24%, P < 0.0001). There were no differences in surgical complications. CONCLUSIONS: Among women with minimal or no SUI symptoms undergoing prolapse repair, concomitant slings resulted in lower rates of bothersome SUI compared with similar women undergoing interval sling placement.
BACKGROUND: Despite large trials designed to guide management on whether to perform a prophylactic continence procedure at the time of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair, it remains unclear if a staged or interval approach confers advantages in treatment of bothersome stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in women without bothersome SUI before their POP repair. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare success of concomitant versus interval slings for the prevention/treatment of de novo bothersome SUI after POP repair. STUDY DESIGN: This multicenter retrospective cohort with prospective follow-up enrolled women with minimal or no SUI symptoms who underwent minimally invasive apical surgery for stage 2 or higher POP between 2011 and 2018 and had a concomitant sling placed at the time of POP surgery or an interval sling placed. Prospectively, all patients were administered the Urogenital Distress Inventory Short-Form 6, the Patient Global Impression of Improvement, and questions on reoperation/retreatment and complications. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients had concomitant slings, and 60 had interval slings. There were no differences in the proportion of patients who had intrinsic sphincter deficiency (22% vs 20%), although the concomitant sling group was more likely to have a positive cough stress test result (30% vs 8%, P = 0.006). The interval sling group was more likely to report "yes" to SUI symptoms on Urogenital Distress Inventory Short-Form 6 (3% vs 30%, P = 0.0006) and during their postoperative visit (0% vs 24%, P < 0.0001). There were no differences in surgical complications. CONCLUSIONS: Among women with minimal or no SUI symptoms undergoing prolapse repair, concomitant slings resulted in lower rates of bothersome SUI compared with similar women undergoing interval sling placement.
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: Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Matthias Egger; Stuart J Pocock; Peter C Gøtzsche; Jan P Vandenbroucke Journal: Lancet Date: 2007-10-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: John T Wei; Ingrid Nygaard; Holly E Richter; Charles W Nager; Matthew D Barber; Kim Kenton; Cindy L Amundsen; Joseph Schaffer; Susan F Meikle; Cathie Spino Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-06-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Linda Brubaker; Geoffrey W Cundiff; Paul Fine; Ingrid Nygaard; Holly E Richter; Anthony G Visco; Halina Zyczynski; Morton B Brown; Anne M Weber Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-04-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ipek Gurol-Urganci; Rebecca S Geary; Jil B Mamza; Jonathan Duckett; Dina El-Hamamsy; Lucia Dolan; Douglas G Tincello; Jan van der Meulen Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-10-23 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Lauren E Giugale; Charelle M Carter-Brooks; James H Ross; Jonathan P Shepherd; Halina M Zyczynski Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Vivian W Sung; Diane Borello-France; Diane K Newman; Holly E Richter; Emily S Lukacz; Pamela Moalli; Alison C Weidner; Ariana L Smith; Gena Dunivan; Beri Ridgeway; John N Nguyen; Donna Mazloomdoost; Benjamin Carper; Marie G Gantz Journal: JAMA Date: 2019-09-17 Impact factor: 56.272