Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2012 Jun;79(6):1256-61.
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2012.02.048. Epub 2012 Apr 25.

Effects of concomitant surgeries during midurethral slings (MUS) on postoperative complications, voiding dysfunction, continence outcomes, and urodynamic variables

Toby C Chai  1 , Kimberly Kenton, Yan Xu, Larry Sirls, Halina Zyczynski, Tracey S Wilson, David D Rahn, Emily L Whitcomb, Yvonne Hsu, Elizabeth A Gormley
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Effects of concomitant surgeries during midurethral slings (MUS) on postoperative complications, voiding dysfunction, continence outcomes, and urodynamic variables

Toby C Chai et al. Urology. 2012 Jun.

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether concomitant surgeries affected outcomes in a randomized trial comparing retropubic midurethral sling (MUS) vs transobturator MUS.

Methods: Subjects (n = 597) were stratified into 4 groups based on type of concomitant surgeries: group I had anterior/apical with or without posterior repairs (n = 79, 13%); group II had posterior repairs or perineorrhaphy only (n = 38, 6%); group III had nonprolapse procedures (n = 34, 6%); and group IV had no concomitant surgeries (n = 446, 75%). Complication rates, voiding dysfunction, objective and subjective surgical failure rates, and changes in urodynamic values (postop minus preop) were assessed and compared in these 4 groups.

Results: There were no differences in complications, voiding dysfunction, and subjective failure outcomes between these 4 groups. Group I had lower odds ratio of objective surgical failure compared with group IV (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.18-0.81, P = .05). The OR of failure of all patients undergoing concomitant surgeries (groups I-III) was lower than group IV (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.95, P = .03). The change in Pdet@Qmax (from pressure-flow) was significantly higher in group III vs IV (P = .01). The change in Q(max.) (from uroflowmetry) was significantly less in groups I and II vs group IV (P = .046 and .04, respectively).

Conclusion: Concomitant surgeries did not increase complications. Subjects who underwent certain concomitant surgeries had lower failure rates than those undergoing slings only. These data support safety and efficacy of performing concomitant surgery at the time of MUS.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Wu JM, Hundley AF, Fulton RG, et al. Forecasting the prevalence of pelvic floor disorders in U. S Women: 2010 to 2050. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:1278–1283. - PubMed
    1. Lawrence JM, Lukacz ES, Nager CW, et al. Prevalence and co-occurrence of pelvic floor disorders in community-dwelling women. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111:678–685. - PubMed
    1. Brubaker L, Cundiff GW, Fine P, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy with Burch colposuspension to reduce urinary stress incontinence. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:1557–1566. - PubMed
    1. Amundsen CL, Flynn BJ, Webster GD. Anatomical correction of vaginal vault prolapse by uterosacral ligament fixation in women who also require a pubovaginal sling. J Urol. 2003;169:1770–1774. - PubMed
    1. Barnes NM, Dmochowski RR, Park R, Nitti VW. Pubovaginal sling and pelvic prolapse repair in women with occult stress urinary incontinence: effect on postoperative emptying and voiding symptoms. Urology. 2002;59:856–860. - PubMed

Publication types