Pubovaginal sling Archives - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2018;40(8):477-490
To compare surgical treatments for stress urinary incontinence in terms of efficiency and complications.
We searched the MEDLINE and COCHRANE databases using the terms stress urinary incontinence, surgical treatment for stress urinary incontinence and sling. Selection of Studies Forty-eight studies were selected, which amounted to a total of 6,881 patients with scores equal to or higher than 3 in the Jadad scale.
Each study was read by one of the authors, added to a standardized table and checked by a second author. We extracted data on intervention details, follow-up time, the results of treatment and adverse events.
Comparing retropubic versus transobturator slings, the former was superior for both objective (odds ratio [OR], 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.54) and subjective (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.02-1.48) cures. Between minislings versus other slings, there was a difference favoring other slings for subjective cure (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39- 0.86). Between pubovaginal sling versus Burch surgery, there was a difference for both objective (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.50-2.77) and subjective (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.10-2.44) cures, favoring pubovaginal sling. Therewas no difference in the groups: midurethral slings versus Burch, pubovaginal sling versus midurethral slings, transobturator slings, minislings versus other slings (objective cure). Retropubic and pubovaginal slings are more retentionist. Retropubic slings have more bladder perforation, and transobturator slings, more leg and groin pain, neurological lesion and vaginal perforation.
Pubovaginal slings are superior to Burch colposuspension surgery but exhibit more retention. Retropubic slings are superior to transobturator slings, with more adverse events. Other slings are superior to minislings in the subjective aspect. There was no difference in the comparisons between midurethral slings versus Burch colposuspension surgery, pubovaginal versus midurethral slings, and inside-out versus outside-in transobturator slings.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2018;40(8):477-490
To compare surgical treatments for stress urinary incontinence in terms of efficiency and complications.
We searched the MEDLINE and COCHRANE databases using the terms stress urinary incontinence, surgical treatment for stress urinary incontinence and sling. Selection of Studies Forty-eight studies were selected, which amounted to a total of 6,881 patients with scores equal to or higher than 3 in the Jadad scale.
Each study was read by one of the authors, added to a standardized table and checked by a second author. We extracted data on intervention details, follow-up time, the results of treatment and adverse events.
Comparing retropubic versus transobturator slings, the former was superior for both objective (odds ratio [OR], 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.54) and subjective (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.02-1.48) cures. Between minislings versus other slings, there was a difference favoring other slings for subjective cure (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39- 0.86). Between pubovaginal sling versus Burch surgery, there was a difference for both objective (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.50-2.77) and subjective (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.10-2.44) cures, favoring pubovaginal sling. Therewas no difference in the groups: midurethral slings versus Burch, pubovaginal sling versus midurethral slings, transobturator slings, minislings versus other slings (objective cure). Retropubic and pubovaginal slings are more retentionist. Retropubic slings have more bladder perforation, and transobturator slings, more leg and groin pain, neurological lesion and vaginal perforation.
Pubovaginal slings are superior to Burch colposuspension surgery but exhibit more retention. Retropubic slings are superior to transobturator slings, with more adverse events. Other slings are superior to minislings in the subjective aspect. There was no difference in the comparisons between midurethral slings versus Burch colposuspension surgery, pubovaginal versus midurethral slings, and inside-out versus outside-in transobturator slings.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2003;25(7):525-528
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032003000700010
PURPOSE: to evaluate the results of the use of bovine pericardium in the pubovaginal sling procedure for treatment of stress urinary incontinence. METHODS: a prospective analysis of five patients who underwent pubovaginal sling with the use of bovine pericardium strip for stress urinary incontinence in the "Hospital das Clínicas of UFMG" from October/2001 to December/2001. The mean age was 48.2±11.5 years (33 to 69 years). RESULTS: the mean surgical time was 45±35.3 min and the mean hospital stay was 36±12.4 h (24 to 48 h). Complications in the periperative or immediate postoperative period did not occur. All patients initially presented satisfactory results with normal voiding and without stress incontinence. Postoperative complications occurred in the 5 patients (100%), with dehiscence of the vaginal wound and total expulsion of the strip in 2 patients (40%) and partial expulsion in 3 patients (60%). All patients presented stress urinary incontinence and were submitted to a new sling procedure using the rectus fascia. The patients then progressed without complications and with improvement of urinary continence in 4 patients (80%). CONCLUSIONS: pubovaginal sling with the use of bovine pericardium was associated with high rates of complications. Therefore, its use is not recommended in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence.
Summary
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2003;25(7):525-528
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032003000700010
PURPOSE: to evaluate the results of the use of bovine pericardium in the pubovaginal sling procedure for treatment of stress urinary incontinence. METHODS: a prospective analysis of five patients who underwent pubovaginal sling with the use of bovine pericardium strip for stress urinary incontinence in the "Hospital das Clínicas of UFMG" from October/2001 to December/2001. The mean age was 48.2±11.5 years (33 to 69 years). RESULTS: the mean surgical time was 45±35.3 min and the mean hospital stay was 36±12.4 h (24 to 48 h). Complications in the periperative or immediate postoperative period did not occur. All patients initially presented satisfactory results with normal voiding and without stress incontinence. Postoperative complications occurred in the 5 patients (100%), with dehiscence of the vaginal wound and total expulsion of the strip in 2 patients (40%) and partial expulsion in 3 patients (60%). All patients presented stress urinary incontinence and were submitted to a new sling procedure using the rectus fascia. The patients then progressed without complications and with improvement of urinary continence in 4 patients (80%). CONCLUSIONS: pubovaginal sling with the use of bovine pericardium was associated with high rates of complications. Therefore, its use is not recommended in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence.