Advertisement

Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports

, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp 93–100 | Cite as

Management of Recurrent Stress Urinary Incontinence After Failed Mid-Urethral Sling Placement

  • Philip A. FontenotJr
  • Priya Padmanabhan
Stress Incontinence and Prolapse (S Reynolds, Section Editor)
  • 32 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Stress Incontinence and Prolapse

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Our objective is to review the current literature on recurrent stress urinary incontinence after mid-urethral sling placement, focusing on evidence-based management considerations for this complex clinical problem.

Recent Findings

Conservative, minimally invasive surgical therapies are currently available for management of persistent or recurrent SUI after a previous mid-urethral sling (MUS).

Summary

Our review of the literature does not show a clear benefit of one approach over others and emphasizes that the ideal management for these complex patients should be determined using an individualized approach with a detailed discussion of patient symptoms, past surgical history, and goals. For symptomatic patients who are surgical candidates and desire intervention, trans-urethral bulking agents, repeat retropubic (RP) MUS, or salvage autologous pubovaginal (PV) sling appear to be the most well-described management strategies.

Keywords

Urinary incontinence Mid-urethral sling Pubovaginal sling Sling failure 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

The research contained in this study did not directly involve human subjects and/or animals and thus no informed consent was necessary.

Conflict of Interest

The authors of this manuscript declare that Dr. Padmanabhan serves as a consultant and speaker for Astellas and consultant for Allergan. Dr. Fontenot has no conflict of interest.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Agur W, Riad M, Secco S, Litman H, Madhuvrata P, Novara G, et al. Surgical treatment of recurrent stress urinary incontinence in women: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Urol. 2013;64(2):323–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hunskaar S, Burgio K (2005) Epidemiology of urinary and faecal incontinence and POP. In: Abrams P, Cardozo L (eds) 3rd international consultation on incontinence. [Web page]:255–312.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pradhan A, Jain P, Latthe PM. Effectiveness of midurethral slings in recurrent stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23:831–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    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(8):1043–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bakali E, Buckley BS, Hilton P, et al. Treatment of recurrent stress urinary incontinence after failed minimally invasive synthetic suburethral tape surgery in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013:CD009407.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd009407.pub2.
  6. 6.
    •• Kavanagh A, Sanaee M, Carlson KV, Bailly GG. Management of patients with stress urinary incontinence after failed midurethral sling. Can Urol Assoc J. 2017;11(6Suppl2):S143. Recent review article providing overview of management options for SUI. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    • Zimmern PE, Gormley E, Stoddard AM, Lukacz ES, Sirls L, Brubaker L, et al. Management of recurrent stress urinary incontinence after burch and sling procedures. Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35(3):344–8. Recent study looking at surgical treatment for recurrent SUI. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fialkow M, Symons RG, Flum D. Reoperation for urinary incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199(546):e1–8.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Denman MA, Gregory WT, Boyles SH, et al. Reoperation 10 years after surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198:555. e1–5CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Albo ME, Richter HE, Brubaker L, Norton P, Kraus SR, Zimmern PE, et al. Burch colposuspension versus fascial sling to reduce urinary stress incontinence. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(21):2143–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Novara G, Artibani W, Barber MD, Chapple CR, Costantini E, Ficarra V, et al. 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(2):218–38.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ford AA, Rogerson L, Cody JD, et al. Midurethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015:CD006375.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd006375.pub3.
  13. 13.
    • Fusco F, Abdel-Fattah M, Chapple CR, Creta M, La Falce S, Waltregny D, et al. 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. 2017; Systematic review discussing SUI management options in 2017. Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Smith AR, Artibani W, Drake MJ. Managing unsatisfactory outcome after midurethral tape insertion. Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30:771–4.  https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.21090.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Han JY, Moon KH, Park CM, Choo MS. Management of recurrent stress urinary incontinence after failed midurethral sling: tape tightening or repeat sling? Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23:1279–84.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-1737-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Richter HE, Litman HJ, Lukacz ES, Sirls LT, Rickey L, Norton P, et al. Demographic and clinical predictors of treatment failure one year after midurethral sling surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117:913–21.  https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e31820f3892.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Holmgren C, Nilsson S, Lanner L, Hellberg D. Long-term results with tension-free vaginal tape on mixed and stress urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106:38–43.  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000167393.95817.dc.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Domochowski RR, Osborn DJ, Reynolds WS. Slings: autologous, biologic, synthetic and midurethral. Campbell-Walsh Urology. 2016;11:1987–2039.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kim J, Wai L, Lucioni A, et al. Long-term efficacy and durability of durasphere urethral bulking after failed urethral sling for stress urinary incontinence. J Urol. 2012;187:e552.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro2012.02.1743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gaddi A, Guaderrama N, Bassiouni N, Bebchuk J, Whitcomb EL. Repeat midurethral sling compared with urethral bulking for recurrent stress urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:1207–12.  https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000000282.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    •• Nikolopoulos KI, Betschart C, Doumouchtsis SK. The surgical management of recurrent stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2015;94(6):568–76. Recent systematic review of recurrent SUI management options. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lee HN, Lee YS, Han JY, Jeong JY, Choo MS, Lee KS. Transurethral injection of bulking agent for treatment of failed mid-urethral sling procedures. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21(12):1479–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Patterson D, Rajan S, Kohli N. Sling plication for recurrent stress urinary incontinence. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2010;16:307–9.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0b013e3181ed3fc3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Feyeux C, Mourtialon P, Guyomard A, Astruc K, Douvier S, Delorme E. Plication of suburethral slings as treatment of persisting or recurring stress urinary incontinence. Prog Urol. 2012;22(16):1033–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Han JY, Lee KS, Choo MS. Management of recurrent or persistent stress urinary incontinence after mid-urethral sling. Low Urin Tract Symptoms. 2012;4(s1):95–101.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Smith AL, Karp DR, Aguilar VC, Davila GW. Repeat versus primary slings in patients with intrinsic sphincter deficiency. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(6):963–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Abdel-Fattah M, Ramsay I, Pringle S, et al. Randomized, prospective, single-blinded study comparing ‘inside-out’ vs. ‘outside-in’ transobturator tapes in the management of urodynamic stress incontinence: one-year outcomes from the E-TOT study. BJOG. 2010;117:870–8.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02544.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Maher C, Dwyer P, Carey M, Gilmour D. The Burch colposuspension for recurrent urinary stress incontinence following retropubic continence surgery. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999;106:719–24.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1999.tb08373.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Moore RD, Speights SE, Miklos JR. Laparoscopic Burch colposuspension for recurrent stress urinary incontinence. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2001;8(3):389–92.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    • Petrou SP, Davidiuk AJ, Rawal B, et al. Salvage autologous fascial sling after failed synthetic midure-thral sling: greater than three-year outcomes. Int J Urol. 2016;23:178–81.  https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.13003. One of a few recent articles looking at salvage sling after MUS. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    • Milose JC, Sharp KM, He C, Stoffel J, Clemens JQ, Cameron AP. Success of autologous pubovaginal sling after failed synthetic mid urethral sling. J Urol. 2015;193(3):916–20. Another recent study looking at salvage sling success after MUS. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Walsh CA, Parkin K, Moore KH. Rectus fascia pubovaginal sling for recurrent stress urinary incontinence after failed synthetic mid-urethral sling. Can Urol Assoc J. 2012;6(6):429–30.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    • Parker WP, Gomelsky A, Padmanabhan P. Autologous fascia pubovaginal slings after prior synthetic anti-incontinence procedures for recurrent incontinence: a multi-institutional prospective comparative analysis to de novo autologous slings assessing objective and subjective cure. Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35(5):604–8. Recent study looking at PVS use after prior MUS procedure. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jain P, Jirschele K, Botros SM, Latthe PM. Effectiveness of midurethral slings in mixed urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22(8):923–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Verbrugghe A, De Ridder D, Van der Aa F. A repeat mid-urethral sling as valuable treatment for persistent or recurrent stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(6):999–1004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Van Baelen AA, Delaere KP. Repeat transobturator tape after failed mid-urethral sling procedure: follow-up with questionnaire-based assessment. Urol Int. 2009;83(4):399–403.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lee KS, Doo CK, Han DH, Jung BJ, Han JY, Choo MS. Outcomes following repeat mid urethral synthetic sling after failure of the initial sling procedure: rediscovery of the tension-free vaginal tape procedure. J Urol. 2007;178(4):1370–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Padmanabhan P, Panfili Z, Parker W, Gomelsky A. Change in urinary storage symptoms following treatment for female stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(8):1169–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    • Aberger M, Gomelsky A, Padmanabhan P. Comparison of retropubic synthetic mid-urethral slings to fascia pubovaginal slings following failed sling surgery. Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35(7):851–4. Recent study comparing MUS to PVS in the setting of prior failed surgery for SUI. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Vayleux B, Rigaud J, Luyckx F, Karam G, Glémain P, Bouchot O, et al. Female urinary incontinence and artificial urinary sphincter: study of efficacy and risk factors for failure and complications. Eur Urol. 2011;59:1048–53.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.03.006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Chung E, Navaratnam A, Cartmill RA. Can artificial urinary sphincter be an effective salvage option in women following failed anti-incontinence surgery? Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22(3):363–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyUniversity of Kansas Health SystemKansas CityUSA

Personalised recommendations