Randomized controlled trial comparing mini-sling with transobturator sling for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence
- 32 Downloads
Introduction and hypothesis
Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is the involuntary loss of urine on effort and is a condition that negatively interferes with various aspects of a woman’s life. This study aimed to demonstrate the non-inferiority of the less invasive single-incision mini-sling (SIMS) method in objective and subjective cures in relation to tension-free transobturator tape (TOT) in two analyses, per protocol and intention to treat, and secondarily to evaluate complications and quality of life.
This study was a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Participants in this study included 105 women with a clinical diagnosis of stress predominant urinary incontinence and urodynamic results demonstrating SUI and absence of detrusor overactivity. Patients were evaluated pre- and postoperatively through anamnesis, physical examination, urinalysis, urine culture and susceptibility testing, simplified pad test, the Urinary Incontinence-Specific Quality of Life Instrument (I-QOL) and Urogenital Distress Inventory Short Form (UDI-6).
Regarding the objective cure, SIMS was non-inferior to TOT (p < 0.05). However, the same was not found for the subjective cure (p > 0.05). There were no differences in the complication rates (p > 0.05). However, in the TOT group, bladder perforation (2.4%), tape exposure (2.4%) and urinary retention occurred, lasting > 7 days (2.4%). In both groups, there was improvement in quality of life after surgery, without significant differences (p > 0.05).
The non-inferiority of SIMS in relation to TOT was only demonstrated in the objective cure. There were no significant differences between groups regarding complications and quality of life.
KeywordsMini-sling Transobturator sling Non-inferiority analysis Complications Quality of life Urinary incontinence
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 3.Barentsen JA, Visser E, Hofstetter H, et al. Severity, not type, is the main predictor of decreased quality of life in elderly women with urinary incontinence: a population-based study as part of a randomized controlled trial in primary care. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012;10:153. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-10-153.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 5.Kowalik CG, Dmochowski RR, De EJB. Surgery for female SUI: the ICI algorithm. Neurourol Urodyn. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23879.
- 14.Ford AA, Rogerson L, Cody JD, et al (2017) Mid-urethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 7:CD006375. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006375.pub4.
- 18.Uebersax JS, Wyman JF, Shumaker SA, et al. Short forms to assess life quality and symptom distress for urinary incontinence in women: the incontinence impact questionnaire and the urogenital distress inventory. Continence program for women research group. Neurourol Urodyn. 1995;14(2):131–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Staat M, Trenz E, Lohmann P. New measurements to compare soft tissue anchoring systems in pelvic floor surgery. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2012.Google Scholar
- 28.Zhang P, Fan B, Zhang P, et al. Meta-analysis of female stress urinary incontinence treatments with adjustable single-incision mini-slings and transobturator tension-free vaginal tape surgeries. BMC Urol. 2015;15:64. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-015-0060-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar