Research Article

Management of the complications of pubovaginal sling surgery

Volume: 3 Number: 3 November 4, 2017
EN

Management of the complications of pubovaginal sling surgery

Abstract

Objective. To present complications of pubovaginal sling surgery (PVS) and their managements. Methods. A total of 21 patients who underwent PVS in 4 different tertiary refferal centers between June 2014 and May 2016 were reviewed retrospectively. Demographic characteristics of the patients, previous 6 history, daily pad use, Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI-6) and Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ) were recorded. Also, the management of the complications were stated. Results. The mean age of the patients were 54.9±12.32 (range, 36-76) years. Six (28.5%) patients had a history of previous incontinence surgery and 15 (71.4%) patients were naïve. There were no intraoperative complications. The mean daily pad use was decreased from 4.04±0.95 to 0.95±0.86 (p=0.0001). While mean preoperative UDI-6 scores were decreased from 6.66±2.09 to 2.09±1.22 (p=0.0001) at postoperative sixth month; preoperative mean IIQ-7 scores decreased from 16.8±1.16 to 5.09±4.21 (p=0.0001) at postoperative sixth month. One (4.76%) patient had abdominal hernia at postoperative 2nd year, three (14.28%) patients had an increased post-micturational residual (150-200ml) and two (9.52%) patients had urinary retention. Conclusion. Although the efficiency of PVS is high; one should aware of complications. The successful management of the complications will increase efficiency and patient satisfaction.

Keywords

References

  1. [1] Anger JT, Weinberg AE, Albo ME, Smith AL, Kim JH, Rodriguez LV, et al. Trends in surgical management of stress urinary incontinence among female Medicare beneficiaries. Urology 2009;74:283-7.
  2. [2] Rac G, Younger A, Clemens JQ, Kobashi K, Khan A, Nitti V, et al. Stress urinary incontinence surgery trends in academic female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery urology practice in the setting of the food and drug administration public health notifications. Neurourol Urodyn 2017;36:1155-60.
  3. [3] Mitsui T, Tanaka H, Moriya K, Kakizaki H, Nonomura K. Clinical and urodynamic outcomes of pubovaginal sling procedure with autologous rectus fascia for stress urinary incontinence. Int J Urol 2007;14:1076-9.
  4. [4] Bang SL, Belal M. Autologous pubovaginal slings: back to the future or a lost art? Res Rep Urol 2016;8:11-20.
  5. [5] Bayrak O, Osborn D, Reynolds WS, Dmochowski RR. Pubovaginal sling materials and their outcomes. Turk J Urol 2014;40:233-9.
  6. [6] Cross CA, Cespedes RD, English SF, McGuire EJ. Transvaginal urethrolysis for urethral obstruction after anti-incontinence surgery. J Urol 1998;159:1199-201.
  7. [7] Sarver R, Govier FE. Pubovaginal slings: past, present and future. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 1997;8:358-68.
  8. [8] 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;356:2143-55.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Health Care Administration

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Omer Bayrak
Department of Urology, Gaziantep University School of Medicine, Gaziantep
Türkiye

Burhan Coskun
Department of Urology, Uludag University School of Medicine, Bursa
Türkiye

Murat Dincer This is me
Department of Urology, University of Health Sciences, Bagcilar Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul
Türkiye

Kadir Onem
Department of Urology, Ondokuz Mayis University School of Medicine, Samsun
Türkiye

Rahmi Onur
Department of Urology, Marmara University School of Medicine, Istanbul
Türkiye

Publication Date

November 4, 2017

Submission Date

January 24, 2017

Acceptance Date

May 27, 2017

Published in Issue

Year 2017 Volume: 3 Number: 3

AMA
1.Bayrak O, Coskun B, Dincer M, Onem K, Onur R. Management of the complications of pubovaginal sling surgery. Eur Res J. 2017;3(3):264-268. doi:10.18621/eurj.287838

Cited By