Premium
REVIEW ARTICLE: Mid‐urethral synthetic slings for female stress urinary incontinence
Author(s) -
Fong Eva D.M.,
Nitti Victor W.
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
bju international
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.773
H-Index - 148
eISSN - 1464-410X
pISSN - 1464-4096
DOI - 10.1111/j.1464-410x.2010.09544.x
Subject(s) - medicine , urinary incontinence , confidence interval , sling (weapon) , randomized controlled trial , urology , surgery
• Mid‐urethral synthetic slings (MUSS) have grown in acceptance and popularity to gain a foremost position in stress urinary incontinence (SUI) surgery. • There are numerous studies that provide a large amount of Level 1 and 2 evidence that support the concept of a sling placed at the level of the mid‐urethra. • Long‐term follow‐up has been published for the original tension‐free vaginal tape (TVT) procedure with the most recent publication providing Level 2 evidence with mean follow‐up of 11.5 years of 69/91 (77%) of patients from the original series. There was objective cure was in 90% of women and 77% considered themselves subjectively cured, based on the Patient Global Impression of Improvement. • Level 1 evidence with long‐term follow‐up has been provided comparing colposuspension to TVT at 2 and 5 years. At 5 years for the primary efficacy variable of a negative 1 h stress pad test, there was no difference in success (81% vs 90%). • Two recent meta‐analyses provide Level 1 evidence comparing outcomes for retropubic vs transobturator MUSS. One included 18 studies, randomized and cohort: cohort studies had a 12.3% failure rate for transobturator and 13.7% failure for the retropubic approach, randomized studies showed 5.7% failure in the transobturator vs 7.8% in the retropubic group. The other meta‐analysis included 11 studies published 2008–2009, which found that the short‐term cure rate was borderline inferior for the transobturator tape group (odds ratio 0.62; 95% confidence interval 0.37–1.00), nearly reaching statistical significance ( P = 0.05). • This review details further comparator evidence and evidence for use in specific patient groups (elderly, obese, intrinsic sphincter deficiency, mixed UI).