Predictors for persistent urodynamic stress incontinence following extensive pelvic reconstructive surgery with and without midurethral sling.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective of this study was to identify the predictors for persistent urodynamic stress incontinence (P-USI) in women following extensive pelvic reconstructive surgery (PRS) with and without midurethral sling (MUS). MMETHODS: A total of 1,017 women who underwent pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery from January 2005 to December 2013 in our institutions were analyzed. We included 349 USI women who had extensive PRS for POP stage III or more of whom 209 underwent concomitant MUS. RESULTS: Of the women who underwent extensive PRS without MUS, 64.3 % (90/140) developed P-USI compared to only 10.5 % (22/209) of those who had concomitant MUS. Those with concomitant MUS and PRS alone were at higher risk of developing P-USI if they had overt USI [odds ratio (OR) 2.2, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.3-4.0, p = 0.014 and OR 4.7, 95 % CI 2.0-11.3, p < 0.001, respectively], maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP) of < 60 cm H2O (OR 5.0, 95 % CI 3.0-8.1, p < 0.001 and OR 5.3, 95 % CI 2.7-10.4, p < 0.001, respectively), and functional urethral length (FUL) of < 2 cm (OR 5.4, 95 % CI 2.7-8.8, p < 0.001 and OR 3.9, 95 % CI 2.4-6.9, p < 0.001, respectively). Parity ≥ 6 (OR 3.9, 95 % CI 1.7-5.2, p < 0.001) and Prolift T (OR 3.1, 95 % CI 1.9-4, p < 0.001) posed a higher risk of P-USI in those with concomitant surgery. Perigee and Avaulta A seemed to be protective against P-USI in those without MUS. CONCLUSIONS: Overt USI with advanced POP together with low MUCP and FUL values have a higher risk of developing P-USI. Therefore, counseling these women is worthwhile while considering the type of mesh used.

Predictors for de novo stress urinary incontinence following extensive pelvic reconstructive surgery.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to look for possible predictors preoperatively for the development of de novo stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in urodynamically continent women who underwent pelvic reconstructive surgery (PRS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medical records of 637 continent women who underwent PRS for severe prolapse from January 2005 to December 2013 in our institutions were included in this study. We excluded women who had urodynamic stress incontinence (UDI) either occult or overt, detrusor overactivity, neurogenic bladder-voiding dysfunction, and previous anti-incontinent surgery. Primary outcome measure was the development of de novo SUI at 6 months to 1 year post operation. RESULTS: Of women in this study, 11 % developed postoperative de novo SUI at 6 months to 1 year of follow-up. Women older than 66 years were 2.86 times [95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.01-2.53, p = 0.14], diabetes mellitus (DM) 2.18 times (95 % CI 1.63-4.21, p = 0.002), certain type of transvaginal mesh procedure 3.5 times (95 % CI, p < 0.001), maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP) < 60 mmH20 4.65 times (95 % CI, 2.87-8.64, p < 0.001), and functional urethral length (FUL) < 2 cm 3.48 times (95 % CI, 2.13-5.83, p < 0.001) at greater risk of developing de novo SUI. CONCLUSIONS: Continent women with advanced pelvic organ prolapse (POP) > 66 years, with DM or low MUCP and FUL values during preoperative urodynamic evaluation have higher risk of developing de novo SUI; therefore, we suggest counselling such women for concomitant PRS and anti-incontinent surgery.

Comparison between Elevate anterior/apical system and Perigee system in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: clinical and sonographic outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the incidence of de novo stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and sonographic features of implanted transvaginal mesh in continent women treated with Elevate(™) anterior/apical [single-incision mesh (SIM-A)] or Perigee(™) [transvaginal mesh with sacrospinous fixation (TVM + SSF)] in extensive pelvic organ reconstruction surgery. METHODS: This prospective observational study was done from May 2010 to January 2013. Patients were recruited from two tertiary centers, and the Elevate(™) and Perigee(™) systems were compared. Patients who had overt or occult SUI, previous prolapse or mesh insertion were excluded. RESULT: Fifty-seven patients in the SIM-A group and sixty-one in the TVM + SSF group were analysed. All completed a minimum of 1-year follow-up. Groups were demographically and statistically similar. There was a significantly high incidence of de novo SUI postoperatively in the SIM-A group. The objective and subjective cure rate of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) were comparable between groups, with incidence of mesh erosion in the SIM-A group and three in the TVM + SSF group. Sonographic evaluation showed significant increase in mesh length in the SIM-A group. CONCLUSION: Elevate(™) a offered lower incidence of mesh erosion and comparable results on anatomical POP correction; however, incidence of de novo SUI was high. There is an apparent lengthening of implanted Elevate® mesh sonographically.