Advertisement

Bladder perforation during sling procedures: diagnosis and management of injury

  • 1 Citations

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Midurethral slings are an effective and minimally invasive treatment for stress urinary incontinence. One of the most common intraoperative complications is bladder perforation, complicating between 2 and 10 % of all operations, and on average 4.7 %. It is usually corrected during surgery, with repositioning of the trocars. The purpose of this video is to demonstrate a method of replacing the trocars under direct vision.

Methods

This video exhibits a bladder perforation during insertion of a retropubic midurethral sling (Advantage Fit™; Boston Scientific) and gives a step-by step guide to the removal and repositioning of the sling under direct visualisation.

Conclusion

Repositioning of the trocars under direct vision in cases of bladder perforation may have numerous advantages. It may prevent damage to the urethra, possibly reduce the risk of postoperative infection and may be beneficial for trainees.

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

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 199

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

References

  1. 1.

    Ulmsten U, Petros P (1995) Intravaginal slingplasty (IVS): an ambulatory surgical procedure for treatment of female urinary incontinence. Scand J Urol Nephrol 29:75–82

  2. 2.

    Cody J, Wyness L, Wallace S et al (2003) Systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of tension-free vaginal tape for treatment of urinary stress incontinence. Health Technol Assess 7(21):1–189

  3. 3.

    Latthe P, Foon R, Toozs-Hobson P (2007) Transobturator and retropubic tape procedures in stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness and complications. BJOG 114:522–531

  4. 4.

    Kuuva N, Nilsson CG (2002) A nationwide analysis of complications associated with the tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) procedure. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 81:72–77

  5. 5.

    Gold RS, Groutz A, Pauzner D, Lessing J, Gordon D (2007) Bladder perforation during tension-free vaginal tape surgery: does it matter? J Reprod Med 52:616–618

  6. 6.

    Abouassaly R, Steinberg JR, Lemieux M, Marois C, Gilchrist LI, Bourque JL et al (2004) Complications of tension-free vaginal tape surgery: a multi-institutional review. BJU Int 94:10–13

  7. 7.

    http://guidance.nice.org.uk/CG171. Accessed 1 October 2013

  8. 8.

    Maguire T, Mayne CJ, Terry T, Tincello DG (2013) Analysis of the surgical learning curve using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method. Neurourol Urodyn 32:964–967

Download references

Acknowledgements

Consent

Written informed consent was obtained from the patient for publication of this video article and any accompanying images.

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Correspondence to F. Israfil-Bayli.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

(M4V 39948 kb)

ESM 1

(M4V 39948 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Israfil-Bayli, F., Bulchandani, S., Parsons, M. et al. Bladder perforation during sling procedures: diagnosis and management of injury. Int Urogynecol J 25, 691–692 (2014) doi:10.1007/s00192-013-2291-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Bladder perforation
  • Stress incontinence
  • Midurethral slings
  • Tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) cystoscopy