Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A cohort study comparing a single-incision sling with a retropubic midurethral sling

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Despite established comparable efficacy between retropubic midurethral (RMUS) and transobturator slings, there are conflicting data regarding single-incision mini-slings (SIMS). This study tests the null hypothesis that the MiniArc® Single-Incision Sling is equivalent to the ALIGN® Urethral Support System for treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI).

Methods

Women who underwent a sling for SUI from 1 January 2008 through 31 December 2009 were identified (N = 324). A follow-up survey was mailed. Primary outcomes were treatment failure, defined as International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ) score >0 or additional anti-incontinence procedure, and stress-specific incontinence (SSI). Secondary outcomes included Patient Global Impression of Severity and Improvement (PGI-SI), satisfaction, de novo urge, and complications.

Results

The study included 202 women who returned the survey. The SIMS group had higher body mass index (BMI) (30.7 ± 6.5 vs 28.9 ± 6.0 kg/m2, P = 0.052) and shorter follow-up (18.6 ± 11.5 vs 22.9 ± 14.6 months, P = 0.019). Treatment failure was higher in SIMS compared with RMUS (76.3 % vs 64.2 %) with adjusted odds ratio of 1.84 (95 % CI, 1.0, 3.5). The SIMS group was more likely to have postoperative SSI, with adjusted OR of 2.4 (95 % CI; 1.3–4.5). The RMUS group reported more improvement and satisfaction. Incidence of de novo urge and complications were similar between groups. Reoperation for mesh erosion was more likely in the RMUS group, while the SIMS had a higher reoperation rate for SUI.

Conclusions

Compared with retropubic ALIGN® Slings, MiniArc® Single-Incision Slings are less effective, with more postoperative incontinence, less patient-reported improvement, satisfaction, and higher reoperation rates for SUI.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Trabuco EC et al (2009) Medium-term comparison of continence rates after rectus fascia or midurethral sling placement. Am J Obstet Gynecol 200(3):300 e1–300 e6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ogah J, Cody DJ, Rogerson L (2011) Minimally invasive synthetic suburethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women: a short version Cochrane review. NeurourolUrodyn 30(3):284–291

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Barber MD et al (2012) Single-incision mini-sling compared with tension-free vaginal tape for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 119(2 Pt 1):328–337

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Abdelwahab O, Shedid I, Al-Adl AM (2010) Tension-free vaginal tape versus secure tension-free vaginal tape in treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. Curr Urol 4:93–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Amat ITL, Martinez Franco E, Lailla Vicens JM (2011) Contasure-Needleless compared with transobturator-TVT for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 22(7):827–833

    Google Scholar 

  6. Andrada Hamer M, Larsson PG, Teleman P, Bergqvist CE, Persson J (2013) One-year results of a prospective randomized, evaluator-blinded, multicenter study comparing TVT and TVT Secur. Int Urogynecol J 24(2):223–229

    Google Scholar 

  7. Basu M, Duckett J (2010) A randomised trial of a retropubic tension-free vaginal tape versus a mini-sling for stress incontinence. BJOG 117(6):730–735

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Enzelsberger H et al (2010) MiniArc (R) versus Monarc (R)—a prospective randomized study of the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence with a follow-up of 2 years. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 70(6):499–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hinoul P et al (2011) A randomized, controlled trial comparing an innovative single incision sling with an established transobturator sling to treat female stress urinary incontinence. J Urol 185(4):1356–1362

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hota LS et al (2012) TVT-Secur (Hammock) versus TVT-Obturator: a randomized trial of suburethral sling operative procedures. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 18(1):41–45

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Masata J et al (2012) Randomized trial of a comparison of the efficacy of TVT-O and single-incision tape TVT SECUR systems in the treatment of stress urinary incontinent women—2-year follow-up. Int Urogynecol J 23(10):1403–1412

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sivaslioglu AA et al (2012) A prospective randomized controlled trial of the transobturator tape and tissue fixation mini-sling in patients with stress urinary incontinence: 5-year results. J Urol 188(1):194–199

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tommaselli GA et al (2010) Efficacy and safety of TVT-O and TVT-Secur in the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: 1-year follow-up. Int Urogynecol J 21(10):1211–1217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wang YJ et al (2011) Comparison of three mid-urethral tension-free tapes (TVT, TVT-O, and TVT-Secur) in the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: 1-year follow-up. Int Urogynecol J 22(11):1369–1374

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bianchi-Ferraro AM et al (2012) Single-incision sling compared with transobturator sling for treating stress urinary incontinence: a randomized controlled trial. Int Urogynecol J 24(9):1459–1465

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Abrams P et al (2003) The standardisation of terminology in lower urinary tract function: report from the standardisation sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Urology 61(1):37–49

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Avery K et al (2004) ICIQ: a brief and robust measure for evaluating the symptoms and impact of urinary incontinence. NeurourolUrodyn 23(4):322–330

    Google Scholar 

  18. Shumaker SA et al (1994) Health-related quality of life measures for women with urinary incontinence: the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire and the Urogenital Distress Inventory. Continence Program in Women (CPW) Research Group. Qual Life Res Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehab 3(5):291–306

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Yalcin I, Bump RC (2003) Validation of two global impression questionnaires for incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 189(1):98–101

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Abdel-Fattah M et al (2011) Single-incision mini-slings versus standard midurethral slings in surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence: a meta-analysis of effectiveness and complications. Eur Urol 60(3):468–480

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kim JJ, Lee YS, Lee KS (2010) Randomized comparative study of the U- and H-type approaches of the TVT-Secur procedure for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: one-year follow-up. Kor J Urol 51(4):250–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Liapis A, Bakas P, Creatsas G (2010) Comparison of the TVT SECUR System “hammock” and “U” tape positions for management of stress urinary incontinence. Int J Gynaecol Obstet Off Organ Int Fed Gynaecol Obstet 111(3):233–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Basu M, Duckett J (2013) Three-year results from a randomised trial of a retropubic mid-urethral sling versus the Miniarc single incision sling for stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J DOI: 10.1007/s00192-013-2125-8

    Google Scholar 

  24. Mostafa A et al (2012) A multicentre prospective randomised study of single-incision mini-sling (Ajust ®) versus tension-free vaginal tape-obturator (TVT-O™) in the management of female stress urinary incontinence: pain profile and short-term outcomes. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 165(1):115–121

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Oliveira R et al (2011) Exploratory study assessing efficacy and complications of TVT-O, TVT-Secur, and Mini-Arc: results at 12-month follow-up. Eur Urol 59(6):940–944

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Palomba S et al (2012) A randomized controlled trial comparing three vaginal kits of single-incision mini-slings for stress urinary incontinence: Surgical data. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 163(1):108–112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lee JK et al (2011) Persistence of urgency and urge urinary incontinence in women with mixed urinary symptoms after midurethral slings: a multivariate analysis. BJOG 118(7):798–805

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Gebhart JB et al (2008) Three-year outcomes of Uretex Urethral Support System for treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19(8):1075–1079

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Barber MD et al (2008) Transobturator tape compared with tension-free vaginal tape for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 111(3):611–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Richter HE et al (2010) Retropubic versus transobturator midurethral slings for stress incontinence. N Engl J Med 362(22):2066–2076

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of Interest

None.

Funding

This study received departmental funds only.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    Annetta M. Madsen, Sherif A. El-Nashar, Christopher J. Klingele, John B. Gebhart & Emanuel C. Trabuco

  2. Methodist Physician Group, Omaha, NE, USA

    Joshua L. Woelk

  3. Department of Obstetrics NS Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Emanuel C. Trabuco

Authors
  1. Annetta M. Madsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sherif A. El-Nashar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joshua L. Woelk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christopher J. Klingele
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. John B. Gebhart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Emanuel C. Trabuco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emanuel C. Trabuco.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Madsen, A.M., El-Nashar, S.A., Woelk, J.L. et al. A cohort study comparing a single-incision sling with a retropubic midurethral sling. Int Urogynecol J 25, 351–358 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2208-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2208-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation