Transcutaneous Temperature Controlled Radiofrequency (TTCRF) for the Treatment of Menopausal Vaginal/Genitourinary Symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of non-ablative, monopolar transcutaneous temperature controlled radiofrequency (TTCRF) technology in the treatment of postmenopausal women suffering from genuine stress urinary incontinence (SUI) related to menopause and to evaluate histological changes vaginally associated with the treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjective and objective symptoms of SUI were assessed in study subjects before and after TTCRF, (1 treatment every 30 days, for 3 months; n=10) and compared with the effects of a placebo treatment on a control group of demographically similar women (n =10). SUI was subjectively evaluated with subjective Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI-6) and with the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UI SF) before and after TTCRF treatments and objectively with cough stress test. Vaginal health was evaluated with the Vaginal Health Index (VHI) score and visual analogue score (VAS) for dyspareunia and dryness. Punch biopsies were obtained at the urethra-vesical junction in the anterior compartment, before and at the end of the treatment protocol. Basic and histochemical staining methods were used. RESULTS: In subjects suffering SUI, TTCRF treatment was associated with a significant (p<0.01) improvement of ICIQ-SF and UDI-6 scores. Seven of 10 patients (70%) had a negative cough stress test after the treatment protocol. Improvements were maintained up to the 12th week of follow-up. The results were supported by the positive histologic changes seen vaginally in women suffering from postmenopausal vaginal atrophy. TTCRF was well tolerated with no complications reported in study patients. CONCLUSION: TTCRF treatment in postmenopausal women suffering from SUI showed significant improvement in both objective and subjective symptoms. Vaginal health scores also improved as did VAS for dryness and dyspareunia. We feel these improvements were related to histological changes related to improvement in vaginal atrophy that were not observed in placebo patients.

Posterior repair with perforated porcine dermal graft.

OBJECTIVE: To compare postoperative vaginal incision separation and healing in patients undergoing posterior repair with perforated porcine dermal grafts with those that received grafts without perforations. Secondarily, the tensile properties of the perforated and non-perforated grafts were measured and compared. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a non-randomized retrospective cohort analysis of women with stage II or greater rectoceles who underwent posterior repair with perforated and non-perforated porcine dermal grafts (Pelvicol(TM) CR Bard Covington, GA USA). The incidence of postoperative vaginal incision separation (dehiscence) was compared. A secondary analysis to assess graft tensile strength, suture pull out strength, and flexibility after perforation was performed using standard test method TM 0133 and ASTM bending and resistance protocols. RESULTS: Seventeen percent of patients (21/127) who received grafts without perforations developed vaginal incision dehiscence compared to 7% (5/71) of patients who received perforated grafts (p = 0.078). Four patients with vaginal incision dehiscence with non-perforated grafts required surgical revision to facilitate healing. Neither tensile strength or suture pull out strength were significantly different between perforated and non-perforated grafts (p = 0.81, p = 0.29, respectively). There was no difference in the flexibility of the two grafts (p = 0.20). CONCLUSION: Perforated porcine dermal grafts retain their tensile properties and are associated with fewer vaginal incision dehiscences.

Posterior repair with perforated porcine dermal graft

OBJECTIVE: To compare postoperative vaginal incision separation and healing in patients undergoing posterior repair with perforated porcine dermal grafts with those that received grafts without perforations. Secondarily, the tensile properties of the perforated and non-perforated grafts were measured and compared. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a non-randomized retrospective cohort analysis of women with stage II or greater rectoceles who underwent posterior repair with perforated and non-perforated porcine dermal grafts (PelvicolTM CR Bard Covington, GA USA). The incidence of postoperative vaginal incision separation (dehiscence) was compared. A secondary analysis to assess graft tensile strength, suture pull out strength, and flexibility after perforation was performed using standard test method TM 0133 and ASTM bending and resistance protocols. RESULTS: Seventeen percent of patients (21/127) who received grafts without perforations developed vaginal incision dehiscence compared to 7 percent (5/71) of patients who received perforated grafts (p = 0.078). Four patients with vaginal incision dehiscence with non-perforated grafts required surgical revision to facilitate healing. Neither tensile strength or suture pull out strength were significantly different between perforated and non-perforated grafts (p = 0.81, p = 0.29, respectively). There was no difference in the flexibility of the two grafts (p = 0.20). CONCLUSION: Perforated porcine dermal grafts retain their tensile properties and are associated with fewer vaginal incision dehiscences.