Advertisement

International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 9, Issue 6, pp 385–390 | Cite as

Pregnancy following incontinence surgery

  • M. Dainer
  • C. D. Hall
  • J. Choe
  • N. Bhatia
Original Article

Abstract

A two-page questionnaire was distributed to 304 members of the American Urogynecology Society. Ninety-nine of the 149 respondents reported that they had performed continence surgery on patients who specifically stated their desire for future childbearing. One hundred and eleven recommended the Burch colposuspension, 29 favored the sling procedure, and others advocated different procedures. Urologists as a subset more often recommended either a sling or needle suspension. Twenty-eight percent of respondents felt a trial of labor and vaginal delivery was indicated following incontinence surgery, but 40% stated that they would always perform cesarean section in these patients. A total of 40 vaginal deliveries and 47 cesarean sections were reported. When postpartum continence status was known, only 73% of women who had vaginal deliveries were continent, whereas 95% were continent following cesarean section. Fisher's exact test revealed this to be a statistically significant difference (P=0.0344).

Keywords

Childbearing Incontinence surgery Pregnancy 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Locher J, Burgio K. Epidemiology of incontinence. In: Ostergard DR, Bent AE eds Urogynecology and urodynamics, 4th edn. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1996;67Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Drutz H, Mainprize T. The Marshall-Marchetti-Krantz procedure: a critical review.Obstet Gynecol Surv 1988;43:724–729Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Giesen JE. Stress incontinence: a review of 270 Marchetti operations.Obstet Gynecol 1974;14:216Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Marchetti A. Urinary incontinence.J Am Med Assoc 1956; 162:1366Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kovac SR, Cruikshank SH. Successful pregnancies and vaginal deliveries after sacrospinous uterosacral fixation in five of nineteen patients.Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993;168:1778–1786Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bergman A, Elia G. Three surgical procedures for genuine stress incontinence. five-year follow-up of a prospective randomized trial.Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;173:66–71Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bergman A, Ballard C, Koonings P. Comparison of three different surgical procedures for genuine stress incontinence: prospective randomized study.Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989; 160:1102–1106.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bhatia N, Bergman A. Modified Burch versus Pereyra retropubic urethropexy for stress urinary incontinence.Obstet Gynecol 1995;66:255–261Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Summit R, Bent AE, Ostergard DR, Harris TA. Stress incontinence and low urethral closure pressure. Correlation of preoperative urethral hypermobility with successful suburethral sling procedures.J Reprod Med 1990;35:877–880Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    McGuire EJ, Bennett CJ, Konnak JA, Sonda LP, Savastano JA. Experience with pubovaginal slings for urinary incontinence at the University of Michigan.J Urol 1987;138:525–526Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chiarelli P, Campbell E. Incontinence during pregnancy: prevalence and opportunities for continence promotion.Aus NZ J Obstet Gynecol 1997;37:66–73Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Handa VL, Harris TA, Ostergard DR. Protecting the pelvic floor: obstetric management to prevent incontinence and pelvic floor prolapse.Obstet Gynecol 1996;88:470–478Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ryhammer AM, Bek KM, Laurberg S. Multiple vaginal deliveries increase the risk of permanent incontinence of flatus and urine in normal premenopausal women.Dis Colon Rectum 1995;38:1206–1209Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Allen RE, Hosker GL, Warrell DW. Pelvic floor damage and childbirth: a neurophysiological study.Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990;97:770–779Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Smith AR, Hosker GL, Warrell DW. The role of partial denervation of the pelvic floor in the etiology of genitourinary prolapse and stress incontinence of urine. A neurophysiological study.Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1989;96:24–28Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hurt WG. Selection of surgical procedure for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. In: Ostergard DR, Bent AE, eds. Urogynecology and urodynamics, 3rd edn. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1991:468Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Dainer
    • 1
  • C. D. Hall
    • 1
  • J. Choe
    • 1
  • N. Bhatia
    • 1
  1. 1.Harbor/UCLA Medical CenterTorranceUSA

Personalised recommendations