International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 6, Issue 6, pp 323–328 | Cite as

Laparoscopic burch repair compared to laparotomy Burch for cure of urinary stress incontinence

  • J. W. Ross
Original Article


Sixty-two women underwent either laparoscopic Burch urethropexy or open Burch urethropexy for surgical correction of genuine stress urinary incontinence. Only patients with no prior incontinence surgery and with demonstrated genuine stress incontinence were included. Clinical evaluations were done preoperatively, at 3 months and 1 year postoperatively for objective cure. The preoperative evaluation included a 24-hour urolog, urology questionnaire, Q-tip test, cough stress test, perineal ultrasound, cystourethroscopy and simple-channel cystometrics. At follow-up all patients had repeat Q-tip test, perineal ultrasound and cough stress test. If there was any sign of leaking a repeat single-channel cystometrogram was done. Only patients with a negative objective study were considered cured. Differences in laparoscopic versus laparotomy cure rates at 1 year were insignificant (94% versus 93%). Both procedures stabilized the urethrovesical junction and prevented its descent during straining, as demonstrated by the postoperative Q-tip test and the perineal ultrasound. The two bladder procedures had comparable operative times but patients with laparoscopy voided earlier, were outpatients, and returned to work earlier. In conclusion, short-term results suggest that the laparoscopic Burch urethropexy can give similar results to laparotomy Burch urethropexy for correction of genuine stress incontinence.

Key words

Burch Laparoscopy Laparotomy Stress incontinence Ultrasound Urethropexy 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Kelly HA, Incontinence of urine in women.Urol Cutan Rev 1913;17:291–329Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stanton SL. Surgery for urinary incontinence.Clin Obstet Gynecol 1978;5:83–108Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Park GS, Miller, EJ. Surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence: a comparison of the Kely plication, Marshall-Marchetti-Krantz, and Pereyra procedures.Obstet Gynecol 1988;71:575–579PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bergman A, Ballard CA, Koonings P. Comparison of three different surgical procedures for genuine stress incontinence: prospective randomized study.Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989; 160:1102–1106PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bhatia NN, Bergman A. Modified Burch versus Peryera retropubic urethropexy for stress urinary incontinence.Obstet Gynecol 1985;66:255–261PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu CY, Paek W. Laparoscopic retropubic colposuspension (Burch procedure).J am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 1993;1:31–35PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Karram MM, Bhatia NN. The Q-tip test: standardization of the technique and its interpretation in women with urinary incontinence.Obstet Gynecol 1988;71:807–811PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ross JW. Transperineal ultrasound measurement of urethrovesical descent in genuine stress incontinence.J Ultrasound Med 1995;14:72Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tanagho EA. Colpocystourethropexy: the way we do it.J Urol 1976;116:751–753PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Abrams P, Blaivas JG, Stanton SL, Andersen JT. The standardization of terminology of lower urinary tract function.Int Urogynecol J 1990;1:45–58Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cardozo LD, Stanton SL, Williams JE. Detrustor instability following surgery for genuine stress incontinence.Br J Urol 1979;51:204–207PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sand PK, Bowen LW, Ostergard DR, Brubaker L, Panganibun R. The effect of retropubic urethropexy on detrusor stability.Obstet Gynecol 1988;71:818–827PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bump RC, Fantl A, Hurt G. Dynamic urethral pressure profilometry pressure transmission ratio determinations after continence surgery: understanding the mechanism of success, failure, and complications.Obstet Gynecol 1988;72:870–874PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lose G, Jorgensen L, Mortensen SO, Molsted-Pedersen L, Kristensen K, Voiding difficulties after colposuspension.Obstet Gynecol 1987;69:33–38PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gillon G, Stanton SL. Long term follow-up surgery for urinary incontinence in elderly women.Br J Urol 1984;56:478–481PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Erikson BC, Hagen B, Eik-Nes SH, Moine K, Mjoinerod OK, Romsio I. Long term effectiveness of the Burch colposuspension in female urinary stress incontinence.Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1990;69:45–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kohorn EI, Scioscia AL, Jeanty P, Hobbins JC. Ultrasound cystourethrography by perineal scanning for the assessment of female stress urinary incontinence.Obstet Gynecol 1986;68:269–272PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gordon D, Pearce M, Norton P, Stanton SL. Comparison of ultrasound and lateral chain urethroscopy in the determination of bladder descent.Obstet Gynecol 1989;160:182–185Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wimja J, Tinga DJ, Visser GA. Perineal ultrasonography in women with stress incontinence and controls: the role of the pelvic floor muscles.Gynecol Obstet Invest 1991;32:176–179PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bergman A, McKenzie J, Richmond J, Ballard CA, Platt LD. Transrectal ultrasound versus cystography in the evaluation of anatomical stress urinary incontinence.Br J Urol 1988;62:228–234PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chang HC, Chang SC, Kuo HC, Tsai TC. Transrectal sonographic cystourethrography: studies in stress urinary incontinence.Urology 1990;36:488–492PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Weill EA, van Waalwiji van Doorn ES, Heesakers JP, Meguid T, Janknegt RA. Transvaginal ultrasonography: a study with healthy volunteers and women with genuine stress incontinence.Eur Urol 1993;24:226–230PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sanders R, Genadry R, Yang A, Mostwin J. Imaging in the female urethra with ultrasound.Ultrasound 1994;12:267–283Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Versi E. The significance of an open bladder neck in women.Br J Urol 1991;68:42–43PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Karram MM. Laparoscopic colposuspension operation: con. Journal of Gynecologic Surgery, 1995;10:205–206Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bhatia NN, Ostergard DR. Urodynamics in women with stress urinary incontinence.Obstet Gynecol 1982;60:552–559PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hilton P, Stanton SL. A clinical and urodynamic assessment of the Burch colposuspension for genuine stress incontinence.Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1983;90:934–939PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hertogs K, Stanton SL. Mechanism of urinary incontinence after colposuspension: barrier studies.Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1985;92:1184–1188PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bump RC, Fantl JA, Hurt WG. Dynamic urethral pressure profilometry pressure transmission ratio determinations after continence surgery: understanding the mechanism of success, failure, complications.Obstet Gynecol 1988;72:870–874PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bergman A, Elia G. Three surgical procedures for genuine stress incontinence: five year follow-up of a prospective randomized study.Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;173:66–71PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecology Journal 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. W. Ross
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Reproductive Medicine and Laparoscopic SurgerySalinasUSA

Personalised recommendations