Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Stress Incontinence and Prolapse (S Reynolds, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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. •• 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fialkow M, Symons RG, Flum D. Reoperation for urinary incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199(546):e1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  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. e1–5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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. • 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.

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Domochowski RR, Osborn DJ, Reynolds WS. Slings: autologous, biologic, synthetic and midurethral. Campbell-Walsh Urology. 2016;11:1987–2039.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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. • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, University of Kansas Health System, 3901 Rainbow Blvd. MS 3016, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA

    Philip A. Fontenot Jr & Priya Padmanabhan

Authors
  1. Philip A. Fontenot Jr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Priya Padmanabhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Priya Padmanabhan.

Ethics declarations

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.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Stress Incontinence and Prolapse

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fontenot, P.A., Padmanabhan, P. Management of Recurrent Stress Urinary Incontinence After Failed Mid-Urethral Sling Placement. Curr Bladder Dysfunct Rep 13, 93–100 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-018-0468-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-018-0468-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation