Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of retropubic (RP) or transobturator (TO) midurethral slings (MUS) in a prospective randomized cohort of Turkish women. Patients and Methods: A total of 54 women with urodynamic stress urinary incontinence (SUI) were randomized to undergo either RP or TO MUS between August 2006 and February 2013 in a tertiary referral center by a single surgeon. All patients had history, physical examination, urodynamic evaluation and quality of life assessments. The validated Turkish versions of the SEAPI, ICIQ-SF and OAB-V8 questionnaires were used. The Advantage® RP and the Obtryx® TO MUS Systems were used for all RP and TO procedures. Results: Twenty-seven patients were randomized to each group. The median follow-up was 48.5 ± 21.8 months. The median hospital stay was 24.0 ± 4.8 h and median operative time was 35.0 ± 19.9 min. The overall objective and subjective cure rates were 92.6 and 79.6%, respectively. The quality of life of all patients significantly increased after the operation compared to their preoperative status. Patients with a poorer subjective cure rate were those with mixed urinary incontinence, whose preoperative SEAPI and OAB-V8 scores were significantly higher. Conclusion: MUS surgery is highly effective and could safely be performed in a cohort of Turkish women with SUI in subspecialty centers by experienced surgeons. There is no significant difference between RP or TO applications in terms of safety and efficacy. Further studies with long-term follow-up data are required.

Keywords:
Urinary incontinence, Midurethral sling, Vaginal mesh, Vaginal tape
1.
Burgio KL, Matthews KA, Engel BT: Prevalence, incidence and correlates of urinary incontinence in healthy, middle-aged women. J Urol 1991;146:1255-1259.
2.
Dursun P, Dogan NU, Kolusari A, Dogan S, Ugur MG, Komurcu O, Altuntas B, Gultekin M, Celik NY, Karaca M, Guzel AB, Cim N, Ege S, Koc O, Yigit FA: Differences in geographical distribution and risk factors for urinary incontinence in Turkey: analysis of 6,473 women. Urol Int 2014;92:209-214.
3.
Dooley Y, Lowenstein L, Kenton K, FitzGerald M, Brubaker L: Mixed incontinence is more bothersome than pure incontinence subtypes. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2008;19:1359-1362.
4.
Frick AC, Huang AJ, van den Eeden SK, Knight SK, Creasman JM, Yang J, Ragins AI, Thom DH, Brown JS: Mixed urinary incontinence: greater impact on quality of life. J Urol 2009;182:596-600.
5.
Ulmsten U, Petros P: Intravaginal slingplasty (IVS): an ambulatory surgical procedure for treatment of female urinary incontinence. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1995;29:75-82.
6.
Deng DY: Urinary incontinence in women. Med Clin North Am 2011;95:101-109.
7.
Bullock TL, Ghoniem G, Klutke CG, Staskin DR: Advances in female stress urinary incontinence: mid-urethral slings. BJU Int 2006;98(suppl 1):32-40; discussion 41-42.
8.
Novara G, Artibani W, Barber MD, Chapple CR, Costantini E, Ficarra V, Hilton P, Nilsson CG, Waltregny D: Updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the comparative data on colposuspensions, pubovaginal slings, and midurethral tapes in the surgical treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. Eur Urol 2010;58:218-238.
9.
Chapple CR, Raz S, Brubaker L, Zimmern PE: Mesh sling in an era of uncertainty: lessons learned and the way forward. Eur Urol 2013;64:525-529.
10.
Schafer W, Abrams P, Liao L, Mattiasson A, Pesce F, Spangberg A, Sterling AM, Zinner NR, van Kerrebroeck P: Good urodynamic practices: uroflowmetry, filling cystometry, and pressure-flow studies. Neurourol Urodyn 2002;21:261-274.
11.
Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten U, van Kerrebroeck P, Victor A, Wein A: The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn 2002;21:167-178.
12.
Cetinel B, Ozkan B, Can G: The validation study of ICIQ-SF: Turkish version. Turk J Urol 2004;30:332-338.
13.
Tarcan T, Akbal C, Tinay İ, Genc Y, İlker Y: Definition of success with SEAPI-QMM quality of life index after tension free vaginal tape procedure: does validation of score sheet in patient's own language effect the outcome? Turk J Urol 2008;34:209-214.
14.
Tarcan T, Mangir N, Ozgur MO, Akbal C: Validation study of Turkish version of OAB-V8 Overactive Bladder Questionnaire. Uroloji Bulteni 2012;21:113-116. http://www.onlinedergi.com/uro/Giris.aspx#.
15.
Delorme E: Transobturator urethral suspension: mini-invasive procedure in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women (in French). Prog Urol 2001;11:1306-1313.
16.
Ulmsten U, Henriksson L, Johnson P, Varhos G: An ambulatory surgical procedure under local anesthesia for treatment of female urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 1996;7:81-85; discussion 85-86.
17.
Darai E, Frobert JL, Grisard-Anaf M, Lienhart J, Fernandez H, Dubernard G, David-Montefiore E: Functional results after the suburethral sling procedure for urinary stress incontinence: a prospective randomized multicentre study comparing the retropubic and transobturator routes. Eur Urol 2007;51:795-801; discussion 801-802.
18.
Porena M, Costantini E, Frea B, Giannantoni A, Ranzoni S, Mearini L, Bini V, Kocjancic E: Tension-free vaginal tape versus transobturator tape as surgery for stress urinary incontinence: results of a multicentre randomised trial. Eur Urol 2007;52:1481-1490.
19.
Abdel-Fattah M, Ramsay I, Pringle S, Hardwick C, Ali H, Young D, Mostafa A: Randomised prospective single-blinded study comparing ‘inside-out' versus ‘outside-in' transobturator tapes in the management of urodynamic stress incontinence: 1-year outcomes from the E-TOT study. BJOG 2010;117:870-878.
20.
Karateke A, Haliloglu B, Cam C, Sakalli M: Comparison of TVT and TVT-O in patients with stress urinary incontinence: short-term cure rates and factors influencing the outcome: a prospective randomised study. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 2009;49:99-105.
21.
Parker-Autry CY, Barber MD, Kenton K, Richter HE: Measuring outcomes in urogynecological surgery: ‘perspective is everything'. Int Urogynecol J 2013;24:15-25.
22.
Nilsson CG, Palva K, Rezapour M, Falconer C: Eleven years prospective follow-up of the tension-free vaginal tape procedure for treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2008;19:1043-1047.
23.
Cetinel B, Tarcan T: Management of complications after tension-free midurethral slings. Korean J Urol 2013;54:651-659.
24.
Arrabal-Polo MA, Palao-Yago F, Zuluaga-Gomez A, Lopez-Leon VM, Merino-Salas S, Lahoz-Garcia C, Arrabal-Martin M: Complications from the placement of a tension-free suburethral sling using the transobturator and retropubic methods for treatment of female urinary incontinence. Urol Int 2012;89:97-102.
25.
Jonsson Funk M, Siddiqui NY, Pate V, Amundsen CL, Wu JM: Sling revision/removal for mesh erosion and urinary retention: long-term risk and predictors. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013;208:73.e1-73.e7.
26.
Jones R, Abrams P, Hilton P, Ward K, Drake M: Risk of tape-related complications after TVT is at least 4%. Neurourol Urodyn 2010;29:40-41.
27.
Pushkar DY, Godunov BN, Gvozdev M, Kasyan GR: Complications of mid-urethral slings for treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2011;113:54-57.
28.
Minaglia S, Ozel B, Klutke C, Ballard C, Klutke J: Bladder injury during transobturator sling. Urology 2004;64:376-377.
29.
Stav K, Dwyer PL, Rosamilia A, Schierlitz L, Lim YN, Lee J: Risk factors for trocar injury to the bladder during mid urethral sling procedures. J Urol 2009;182:174-179.
30.
US Food and Drug Administration: Update on serious complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse: FDA safety communication. http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/AlertsandNotices/ucm262435.htm.
31.
Osman NI, Mangera A, Roman S, Bullock AJ, MacNeil S, Chapple CR: Mesh social networking: a patient-driven process. BJU Int 2012;109:E45-E46; author reply E46.
32.
American Urological Association: AUA position statement on the use of vaginal mesh for the repair of pelvic organ prolapse. https://www.auanet.org/about/vaginal-mesh-for-pelvic-organ-prolapse.cfm.
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel
2014
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.