Concomitant transobturator tape and anterior colporrhaphy versus transobturator subvesical mesh for cystocele-associated stress urinary incontinence.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and cystocele often occur concomitantly and thus may potentially be treated via a single surgical procedure. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of concomitant transobturator tape (TOT) with anterior colporrhaphy versus subvesical transobturator mesh (TOM) for cystocele-associated SUI. METHODS: This prospective, clinical trial included women with cystocele-associated SUI. Patients were randomly allocated into either group I (anterior colporrhaphy with concomitant TOT "in-out" fixation) or group II (implantation of a subvesical four-armed TOM). All patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months postoperatively. Statistical tests were performed to compare the group outcomes based on objective, subjective, and anatomical variables. RESULTS: There were 81 patients in group I and 83 in group II. Median follow-up duration was 12 months. The demographic data and baseline clinical characteristics of both groups were comparable. There were no significant differences between groups regarding the success rates of SUI and cystocele repair. Groups I and II had similar cure rates of SUI (82.9 and 88.4%, respectively; p = 0.369) and incidences of successful cystocele repair (85.4 and 97.7%, respectively; p = 0.055). No urethral or bladder injuries or mesh erosions were reported. Both groups had comparable postoperative complications, except the greater incidence of micturition difficulty in group I than group II, during the early follow-up (12.2% vs. 0.0%; p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: Transvaginal mesh was not superior to native tissue repair. Anterior colporrhaphy and TOT may be an appropriate alternative to four-armed TOM application for concomitant correction of SUI and cystocele.

Rigid ureteroscopy for ureteral stones: factors associated with intraoperative adverse events.

PURPOSE: To analyze some of the factors that may be associated with a higher incidence of complications during management of ureteral stones by rigid ureteroscopy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed all ureteroscopic interventions aimed at stone extraction and/or fragmentation in our institution from 2001 through 2005. A total of 442 interventions were eligible for inclusion. Our focus was concentrated on (1) patient characteristics (age, gender, duration of symptoms, history of urinary schistosomiasis, and history of surgery involving the affected ureter), (2) stone characteristics (number, length, width, and level of the ureter affected), (3) the affected reno-ureteral unit (which side was affected, the kidney's ability to excrete contrast medium, and the status of the ureter proximal and distal to the stone), and finally (4) experience level of the surgeon in charge (junior v senior). The occurrence of intraoperative adverse events was considered a dependent variable and was statistically related to each of the above factors as independent variables. RESULTS: Intraoperative adverse events were encountered in 121 interventions including stone migration in 54, minor mucosal injuries in 24, ureteral perforation in 12, ureteral avulsion in 2, and aborted procedure due to bleeding or edema in 29. Symptomatology present for more than 3 months, a negative history of schistosomiasis, a positive history of ureteral surgery, stones above the ischial spines, stones >5 mm in width, a dilated proximal ureter, kidneys that failed to excrete contrast medium, and involvement of a more junior urologist were factors that were associated with a statistically significantly higher incidence of intraoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Rigid ureteroscopic stone manipulation remains a procedure that should be handled cautiously. Existence of any of the above risk factors should alert urologists, particularly at training centers, to adopt all possible precautionary measures.