Cost-effectiveness of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation versus extended release tolterodine for overactive bladder.

PURPOSE: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation vs extended release tolterodine for the treatment of overactive bladder. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 1-year time frame cost-effectiveness model from a societal perspective was developed by comparing medical costs and quality of life determined by improved continence and therapy side effects of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation and tolterodine ER. Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation therapy consisted of 12 sessions for 3 months followed by maintenance therapy. Significant side effects of both strategies can result in reduced quality of life or therapy termination. Parameter estimates included utilities of improved urinary incontinence (0.92) and continued urinary incontinence (0.73), reduction in quality of life from side effects (5%), cost of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation per session ($203) and cost of tolterodine ER per month ($150). Our primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, defined as the marginal cost per quality adjusted life-years gained. Less than $50,000 per quality adjusted life-year gained was considered cost-effective. The uncertainty of input parameters was addressed by 1-way sensitivity analyses and Monte Carlo simulation to assess the robustness of the model. RESULTS: Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation added significant cost to the management of overactive bladder with modest improvement in quality of life. For every 100 patients treated with percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation the costs increased by $303,480 and resulted in an additional 4.3 quality adjusted life-years gained compared to tolterodine ER. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $70,754 per quality adjusted life-year gained. In the Monte Carlo analysis percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation was cost-effective only 21% of the time. CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation was not cost-effective for treating overactive bladder vs tolterodine ER under a wide range of clinical circumstances.

Ischiorectal abscess and ischiorectal-vaginal fistula as delayed complications of posterior intravaginal slingplasty: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Synthetic meshes have been used extensively to augment surgical management of pelvic organ prolapses. Posterior intravaginal sling (IVS) is a technique used for correcting vaginal vault/apical prolapse, posterior vaginal prolapse or rectocele. There are limited data on long-term safety of this procedure. In a subanalysis of the IVS tapes from the SUSPEND trial performed secondary to the large number of patients with complications of suburethral sling erosions after IVS, it was noted that the sling erosion tended to have a delayed presentation secondary to poor incorporation of the mesh. CASE: A 48-year-old woman with cystocele, uterine prolapse and rectocele had undergone total vaginal hysterectomy, mesh-augmented anterior repair, posterior colporrhaphy and posterior intravaginal slingplasty (IVS) in July 2005. Thirty months after the surgery, she presented with gradual symptoms of copious vaginal discharge for several weeks followed by constant right buttock pain and swelling. Examination was notable for intact mesh with no signs of erosion and a 3-cm induration deep within the right buttock. Computed tomography suggested a pelvic abscess. Magnetic resonance imaging confirmed a right ischiorectal fossa abscess and a vaginal fistula. The patient underwent sling excision, right ischiorectal fossa exploration and vaginal fistula repair. A fistulous tract was found to extend along the intact sling from the vaginal epithelium toward the right ischiorectal fossa. At 2 months' followup, there were no recurrences or other complications. CONCLUSION: This is the first report of a delayed complication of an ischiorectal abscess associated with an ischiorectal-vaginal fistula that presented 30 months after the placement of a posterior IVS.

Anterior intravaginal slingplasty tunneller device for stress incontinence and posterior intravaginal slingplasty for apical vault prolapse: a 2-year prospective multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to report the outcome for (1) anterior intravaginal slingplasty in the treatment of urodynamic stress incontinence and (2) posterior intravaginal slingplasty for apical prolapse (> or = stage II). STUDY DESIGN: This was a 2-year prospective multicenter study: patients, 430; anterior intravaginal slingplasty, 144; posterior intravaginal slingplasty, 164; both procedures, 122 (552 tapes total). At 6 and 12 months, the results of the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire, cough stress test, and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantitation were assessed. Statistical analyses used paired t-tests. RESULTS: Of the women in the study, 95% (42 women) had a negative cough stress test result through 12 months (n = 44 women), and 96% (127 women) had a negative cough stress test result at 6 months (n = 132). At 6 months, apical support was optimal in 95.3% (143/150 women) and was satisfactory in 2.7% (4/150 women) and at 12 months, 98.1% (52/53 women), 1.9% (1/53 women). Seventeen of 430 patients (4.0%) had vaginal mesh extrusion. Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire scores significantly improved (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Anterior intravaginal slingplasty and posterior intravaginal slingplasty are safe and effective when performed with other procedures. For anterior intravaginal slingplasty, the rates of perforation and retention are low, but early extrusions are seen. Patients showed improvements in the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire, regardless of extrusion.