A national population-based cohort study of urethral injection therapy for female stress and mixed urinary incontinence: the Danish Urogynaecological Database, 2007–2011
- 273 Downloads
Introduction and hypothesis
Urethral injection therapy (UIT) has been performed since the early 20th century and a variety of agents have been launched. In 2006, polyacrylamide hydrogel (PAGH) was introduced and is now widely used as an agent. The objective was to evaluate the efficacy of PAGH based on a national population over a 5-year period (2007–2011) and the influence of patient-related factors, surgeon experience, and department volume.
A retrospective cohort study was carried out based on data from the Danish Urogynaecological Database (DugaBase).
A total of 731 women were registered in the DugaBase. Cure was achieved in 75 out of 252 women (29.8%) and no leakage at all in 23 out of 252 (9.1%) at the 3-month follow-up. The mean total International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF) score decreased from 16 (SD 3.8) to 10.6 (SD 6.2; p < 0.001). UIT was performed at 16 departments, of which four high-volume departments performed 547 out of 814 UITs (67.2%). Women with severe UI had a decreased chance of cure (all ICIQ-SF scores), as did women on antimuscarinic drugs (adjusted OR 0.14; 95%, CI 0.04–0.41 “frequency”) and (adjusted OR 0.33; 95%, CI 0.13–0.82, “amount”). Women treated by a high-volume surgeon had a higher chance of cure (OR 4.51; 95% CI, 1.21–16.82, “frequency”) and a lower risk of 30-day hospital contacts (OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.09–0.76).
The study represented a cure for UIT among women in an everyday life setting. A surgeon learning curve for UIT was indicated, as was assigning interventions to fewer hands to improve the surgical training value and consequently the cure rate for women with UIT.
KeywordsUrethral injection therapy Patient-related outcome measures Surgeon volume Department volume National population
Funding was provided by Aase og Ejnar Danielsens Fond and Edgar Schnohr og Hustru Gilberte Schnohr’s Fond. The Centre for Quality, Region of Southern Denmark, Middelfart, and the University of Southern Denmark financed the study.
Compliance with ethical standards
The study was approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (J.nr. 2012-41-0414). As the study did not include patient contact, it was not necessary to obtain approval from the Health Research Ethics Committee.
Conflicts of interest
Margrethe Foss Hansen incurred conference and travel expenses for attendance at the EUGA Leading Lights in Urogynaecology Congress, Warsaw, 2015, paid for by Astella. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
- 1.Meyer L. 2 tilfælde af incontinentia urinae helbredte ved parafininjektioner. Ugeskr Laeger. 1904;104:5.Google Scholar
- 6.Beraru A, Droupy S, Wagner L, Soustelle L, Muyschondt C, Ben Naoum K, et al. Efficacy of periurethral injections of polyacrylamide hydrogel (Bulkamid(®)) and quality of life of patients with urinary incontinence due to sphincter deficiency (IUE-IS). Prog Urol. 2014;24(8):501–10. doi: 10.1016/j.purol.2014.02.003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 7.Leone Roberti Maggiore U, Alessandri F, Medica M, Gabelli M, Venturini PL, Ferrero S. Outpatient periurethral injections of polyacrylamide hydrogel for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: effectiveness and safety. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013;288(1):131–7. doi: 10.1007/s00404-013-2718-y.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Toozs-Hobson P, Al-Singary W, Fynes M, Tegerstedt G, Lose G. Two-year follow-up of an open-label multicenter study of polyacrylamide hydrogel (Bulkamid®) for female stress and stress-predominant mixed incontinence. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23(10):1373–8. doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-1761-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 16.Shah PJR. Injectables and GSI. Urol News. 1997;2:7–11.Google Scholar
- 19.Guldberg R, Kesmodel US, Hansen JK, Gradel KO, Brostrom S, Kaerlev L, et al. Patient reported outcome measures in women undergoing surgery for urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in Denmark, 2006–2011. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(7):1127–34. doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-1979-5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 20.Schiøler G, Larsen OB (2005) Klassifikation af operationer. 2 edn. Copenhagen: MunksgaardGoogle Scholar
- 21.Danish Urogynaecological Database, annual report 2007. Accessed 12 August 2016Google Scholar
- 25.STROBE (2016) Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE). http://www.strobe-statement.org/index.php?id=available-checklists. Accessed 21 June 2016
- 26.International Classification of Diseases (ICD10). http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/ICD-10_2nd_ed_volume2.pdf. Accessed 31 August 2016
- 30.Statens Serum Institut. http://www.ssi.dk/Sundhedsdataogit/Sundhedsvaesenet%20i%20tal/Sundhedsveasenet%20generelt/Operationer/Operationer%20Regionsfordelt.aspx. Accessed 31 August 2016