Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Overview of Surgical Management of Urinary Incontinence

  • Urology (Michael Phelan, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Surgery Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Stress and urgency urinary incontinence are burdensome conditions that have large effects on the quality of life of patients, along with having a high-cost burden on the United States healthcare system. Though conservative therapies are first line, surgical management is an excellent option for when symptoms fail to improve. This review will summarize guideline-supported surgical techniques for urinary incontinence and discuss emerging therapies undergoing development.

Recent Findings

Guideline supported options for stress urinary incontinence include injection of bulking agents, midurethral slings, autologous fascial pubovaginal slings, and Burch colposuspension. Emerging therapies include single-incision slings and the use of vaginal lasers. For urgency urinary incontinence, surgical interventions include intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA injections, peripheral tibial nerve stimulation, and sacral neuromodulation. Newer innovative therapies are focused on pudendal or dorsal nerve neuromodulation and radiofrequency device therapy within the bladder.

Summary

There are numerous guideline supported surgical options present for stress and urgency urinary incontinence, with multiple being minimally invasive and having strong evidence for long-term efficacy. Future directions in the field are focused on creating therapies that have the ideal combination of having long-term efficacy, are cost-effective, minimally invasive, and with minimal side effects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

References of particular interest have been highlighted as: •Of importance, ••Of major importance

  1. DeLancey JOL. Structural support of the urethra as it relates to stress urinary incontinence: The hammock hypothesis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;170(6):1713–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9378(94)70346-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mcguire EJ, Lytton B. Pubovaginal sling procedure for stress incontinence. J Urol. 1978;119(1):82–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)57390-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Luber KM. The definition, prevalence, and risk factors for stress urinary incontinence. Rev Urol. 2004;6(3):3–9.

    Google Scholar 

  4. ••Gormley EA, Lightner DJ, Burgio KL, Chai TC, Clemens JQ, Culkin DJ, et al. Diagnosis and Treatment of Overactive Bladder (Non-Neurogenic) in Adults: AUA/SUFU Guideline. Journal of Urology. 2012;188(6S):2455–63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.09.079. Evidence-based guideline statements from the American Urological Association (AUA) and Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine & Urogenital Reconstruction (SUFU) that provide a framework for diagnosis, overall management, and various treatment options for non-neurogenic overactive bladder.

  5. Hartmann KE, McPheeters ML, Biller DH, Ward RM, McKoy JN, Jerome RN, et al. Treatment of overactive bladder in women. Evid Rep Technol Assess. 2009;187:1–120.

    Google Scholar 

  6. ••Kobashi KC, Albo ME, Dmochowski RR, Ginsberg DA, Goldman HB, Gomelsky A, et al. Surgical Treatment of Female Stress Urinary Incontinence: AUA/SUFU Guideline. Journal of Urology. 2017;198(4):875–83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.06.061. Evidence-based guideline statements from the AUA and SUFU that focuses on surgical options for treatment of SUI along with current data associated with each treatment. Evaluation, indications, and patient counseling is also discussed.

  7. Hussain SM, Bray R. Urethral bulking agents for female stress urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn. 2019;38(3):887–92. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23924.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten U, et al. The standardisation of terminology in lower urinary tract function: report from the standardisation sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Urology. 2003;61(1):37–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0090-4295(02)02243-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kerr LA. Bulking agents in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence: history, outcomes, patient populations, and reimbursement profile. Rev Urol. 2005;7(1):S3-s11.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Zheng Y, Rovner E. Update on urethral bulking for stress urinary incontinence in women. Curr Urol Rep. 2022;23(10):203–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-022-01099-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kirchin V, Page T, Keegan PE, Atiemo KO, Cody JD, McClinton S, et al. Urethral injection therapy for urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;7(7):cd003881. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003881.pub4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ghoniem G, Boctor N. Update on urethral bulking agents for female stress urinary incontinence due to intrinsic sphincter deficiency. J Urol Res. 2014;1(2):1009.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Chapple C, Dmochowski R. Particulate versus non-particulate bulking agents in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Res Rep Urol. 2019;11:299–310. https://doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S220216.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Hoe V, Haller B, Yao HH, O’Connell HE. Urethral bulking agents for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women: a systematic review. Neurourol Urodyn. 2021;40(6):1349–88. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.24696.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ford AA, Rogerson L, Cody JD, Aluko P, Ogah JA. Mid-urethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;7(7):cd006375. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006375.pub4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nilsson CG, Palva K, Aarnio R, Morcos E, Falconer C. Seventeen years’ follow-up of the tension-free vaginal tape procedure for female stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(8):1265–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2090-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. •Richter HE, Albo ME, Zyczynski HM, Kenton K, Norton PA, Sirls LT, et al. Retropubic versus Transobturator Midurethral Slings for Stress Incontinence. New England Journal of Medicine. 2010;362(22):2066–76. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0912658. Multicenter, randomized equivalence trial that compared treatment success at 12 months between retropubic versus transobturator MUS in women with stress urinary incontinence. Prior to this trial, there was limited data that compared different types of slings.

  18. Kenton K, Stoddard AM, Zyczynski H, Albo M, Rickey L, Norton P, et al. 5-year longitudinal followup after retropubic and transobturator mid urethral slings. J Urol. 2015;193(1):203–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.08.089.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Daneshgari F, Kong W, Swartz M. Complications of mid urethral slings: important outcomes for future clinical trials. J Urol. 2008;180(5):1890–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.07.029.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Delorme E. Transobturator urethral suspension: mini-invasive procedure in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women. Prog Urol. 2001;11(6):1306–13.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine & Urogenital Reconstruction, Mesh Midurethral Slings for Stress Urinary Incontinence. 2019. https://sufuorg.com/docs/mus/sufu-mus-position-statementx.aspx.

  22. Kwon J, Kim Y, Kim DY. Second-line surgical management after midurethral sling failure. Int Neurourol J. 2021;25(2):111–8. https://doi.org/10.5213/inj.2040278.139.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. •Albo ME, Richter HE, Brubaker L, Norton P, Kraus SR, Zimmern PE, et al. Burch Colposuspension versus Fascial Sling to Reduce Urinary Stress Incontinence. New England Journal of Medicine. 2007;356(21):2143–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa070416. Multicenter, randomized clinical trial that compared treatment success at 24 months in women with SUI who underwent the autologous rectus fascia PVS versus Burch colposuspension procedure. Prior to this trial, there were few randomized control trials comparing surgical procedures for SUI.

  24. Nazemi TM, Kobashi KC. Complications of grafts used in female pelvic floor reconstruction: Mesh erosion and extrusion. Indian J Urol. 2007;23:153–60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Chaikin DC, Rosenthal J, Blaivas JG. Pubovaginal fascial sling for all types of stress urinary incontinence: long-term analysis. J Urol. 1998;160:1312–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ostergard DR. Primary slings for everyone with genuine stress incontinence? The argument against. Int Urogynecol J PelvicFloor Dysfunct. 1997;8:321–2.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Peng M, Sussman RD, Escobar C, Palmerola R, Pape DM, Smilen SS, et al. Rectus fascia versus fascia lata for autologous fascial pubovaginal sling: a single-center comparison of perioperative and functional outcomes. Urogynecology. 2020;26(8):493–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000761.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Athanasopoulos A, Gyftopoulos K, McGuire EJ. Efficacy and preoperative prognostic factors of autologous fascia rectus sling for treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. Urology. 2011;78(5):1034–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2011.05.069.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Morgan TO Jr, Westney OL, McGuire EJ. Pubovaginal sling: 4-year outcome analysis and quality of life assessment. J Urol. 2000;163(6):1845–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(05)67557-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lapitan MCM, Cody JD, Mashayekhi A. Open retropubic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;7(7):cd002912. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002912.pub7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Dean N, Ellis G, Herbison GP, Wilson D, Mashayekhi A. Laparoscopic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002239.pub3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Galloway NT, Davies N, Stephenson TP. The complications of colposuspension. Br J Urol. 1987;60:122–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Demirci F, Yucel O, Eren S, Alkan A, Demirci E, Yildirim U. Long-term results of Burch colposuspension. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2001;51(4):243–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Nambiar A, Cody JD, Jeffery ST, Aluko P. Single-incision sling operations for urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;7(7):cd008709. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008709.pub3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Lane GI, Barboglio-Romo P, Crescenze I, Raza D, Clemens JQ, Dahm P, Gupta P. 2020 Vaginal lasers for treating stress urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;6:CD013643. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lin KL, Chou SH, Long CY. Effect of Er:YAG laser for women with stress urinary incontinence. Biomed Res Int. 2019;2019:7915813. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/7915813.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Lin YH, Chiang BJ, Liao CH. Mechanism of action of botulinum toxin a in treatment of functional urological disorders. Toxins (Basel). 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins12020129.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Rovner E. Chapter 6: practical aspects of administration of onabotulinumtoxinA. Neurourol Urodyn. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.22637.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. •Visco AG, Brubaker L, Richter HE, Nygaard I, Paraiso MF, Menefee SA, et al. Anticholinergic versus botulinum toxin A comparison trial for the treatment of bothersome urge urinary incontinence: ABC trial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2012;33(1):184–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2011.09.019. Randomized, double-blind, control trial that compared UUI episodes over 6 months, along with overall tolerability and cost effectiveness between anticholinergic therapy versus intra-detrusor botulinum toxin injection. An innovative trial that challenged traditional clinical beliefs and treatment approaches for moderate to severe UUI.

  40. Gupta P, Ehlert MJ, Sirls LT, Peters KM. Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation and sacral neuromodulation: an update. Curr Urol Rep. 2015;16(2):4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-014-0479-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Cooperberg MR, Stoller ML. Percutaneous neuromodulation. Urol Clin North Am. 2005;32(1):71–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2004.09.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Sanford MT, Suskind AM. Neuromodulation in neurogenic bladder. Transl Androl Urol. 2016;5(1):117–26. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2223-4683.2015.12.01.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. •Peters KM, Carrico DJ, Perez-Marrero RA, Khan AU, Wooldridge LS, Davis GL, et al. Randomized Trial of Percutaneous Tibial Nerve Stimulation Versus Sham Efficacy in the Treatment of Overactive Bladder Syndrome: Results From the SUmiT Trial. Journal of Urology. 2010;183(4):1438–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.12.036. Multicenter, double-blind randomized control trial that compared the efficacy at 12 weeks of PTNS versus sham therapy. This trial was the first randomized controlled neuromodulation study, providing level I evidence and corroborating existing published data regarding the safety and efficacy of PTNS.

  44. Peters KM, Carrico DJ, Wooldridge LS, Miller CJ, MacDiarmid SA. Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation for the long-term treatment of overactive bladder: 3-year results of the step study. J Urol. 2013;189(6):2194–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.11.175.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Peters KM, MacDiarmid SA, Wooldridge LS, Leong FC, Shobeiri SA, Rovner ES, et al. Randomized trial of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation versus extended-release tolterodine: results from the overactive bladder innovative therapy trial. J Urol. 2009;182(3):1055–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. ••Mitchell MJ, Milhouse OF, Siegal SW: Neuromodulation. In: Smith, JA, Howards SS, Preminger GM, Dmochowski RR. Hinman’s Atlas of Urologic Surgery. Elsevier Inc; 2019. This chapter on neuromodulation is one of numerous in this gold standard, step-by-step guided atlas for urologic surgery.

  47. Goldman HB, Lloyd JC, Noblett KL, et al. International continence society best practice statement for use of sacral neuromodulation. Neurourol Urodyn. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23596.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Powell CR. Troubleshooting interstim sacral neuromodulation generators to recover function. Curr Urol Rep. 2018;19(10):86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-018-0837-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. •Amundsen CL, Richter HE, Menefee SA, Komesu YM, Arya LA, Gregory WT, et al. OnabotulinumtoxinA vs sacral neuromodulation on refractory urgency urinary incontinence in women: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2016;316(13):1366–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Amundsen CL, Komesu YM, Chermansky C, Gregory WT, Myers DL, Honeycutt EF, et al. Two-Year Outcomes of Sacral Neuromodulation Versus OnabotulinumtoxinA for Refractory Urgency Urinary Incontinence: a Randomized Trial. Eur Urol. 2018;74(1):66–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.02.011.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Siegel S, Noblett K, Mangel J, Griebling TL, Sutherland SE, Bird ET, et al. Results of a prospective, randomized, multicenter study evaluating sacral neuromodulation with InterStim therapy compared to standard medical therapy at 6-months in subjects with mild symptoms of overactive bladder. Neurourol Urodyn. 2015;34(3):224–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Schmidt RA, Jonas U, Oleson KA, Janknegt RA, Hassouna MM, Siegel SW, et al. Sacral nerve stimulation for treatment of refractory urinary urge incontinence sacral nerve stimulation study group. J Urol. 1999;162(2):352–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. van Kerrebroeck PE, van Voskuilen AC, Heesakkers JP, Lycklama á Nijholt AA, Siegel S, Jonas U, et al. Results of sacral neuromodulation therapy for urinary voiding dysfunction: outcomes of a prospective, worldwide clinical study. J Urol. 2007;178(5):2029–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.07.032.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Marinkovic SP. New technologies in the management of overactive bladder: current research and future prospects. Ther Adv Urol. 2019;11:1756287219844669.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Coyne KS, Wein A, Nicholson S, Kvasz M, Chen CI, Milsom I. Economic burden of urgency urinary incontinence in the United States: a systematic review. J Manag Care Pharm. 2014;20(2):130–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Partin AW, Peters CR, Kavoussi LR. Campbell-Walsh urology. 12th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Saunders; 2020.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research has no funding to report.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Rush University Medical Center, 1725 W Harrison Street, Suite 970, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA

    Jamie Yoon, Kyle Dymanus & Sarah Adelstein

Authors
  1. Jamie Yoon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kyle Dymanus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sarah Adelstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to planning, writing, and reviewing the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah Adelstein.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors report no proprietary or commercial interest in any product mentioned or concept discussed in this article.

Human and Animal Rights

The article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yoon, J., Dymanus, K. & Adelstein, S. Overview of Surgical Management of Urinary Incontinence. Curr Surg Rep 11, 251–259 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40137-023-00371-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40137-023-00371-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation