| PUBOVAGINAL
SLING IN THE TREATMENT OF STRESS URINARY INCONTINENCE FOR URETHRAL HYPERMOBILITY
AND INTRINSIC SPHINCTERIC DEFICIENCY
(
Download pdf )
AGNALDO L. SILVA-FILHO,
SÉRGIO A. TRIGINELLI, MAURÍCIO B. NOVIELLO, ADMÁRIO
S. SANTOS-FILHO, CLEIDISMAR R. PIRES, J. RENAN CUNHA-MELO
Department
of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Department of Surgery, and Section of Urology,
School of Medicine, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte,
Minas Gerais, Brazil
ABSTRACT
Purpose:
This study was undertaken to evaluate the use of pubovaginal sling for
the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence in patients with intrinsic
sphincteric deficiency and patients with urethral hypermobility.
Materials and Methods: Sixty-two patients
aging 22 to 73 years-old (mean = 49.6) with a median parity of 4.1 (range
0 - 14) who underwent pubovaginal autologous fascial sling procedures
for stress urinary incontinence from August/1999 to August/2002 were prospectively
analyzed. Objective pre and postoperative urodynamic evaluation was performed
in all cases. The patients were divided into 2 groups: thirty-nine patients
(62.9%) with urethral hypermobility (Valsalva leak point pressure equal
or superior to 60 cm of H2O) and twenty-three patients (37.1%) with intrinsic
sphincteric insufficiency (Valsalva leak point pressure below 60 cm of
H2O).
Results: The average follow-up period was
24.8 months, ranging from 3 to 38 months. Three patients (4.8%) had detrusor
overactivity before the operation, and 36 patients (58.1%) had voiding
dysfunction before surgery. The postoperative objective cure rate was
88.7% for stress urinary incontinence. The study also showed that 32.2%
of the patients had voiding dysfunction and 11.3% had detrusor overactivity.
The mean hospital stay was 3.1 days (range 2 - 4). No difference in the
above parameters was noticed between patients with intrinsic sphincteric
deficiency and those with urethral hypermobility.
Conclusion: Construction of a pubovaginal
sling is an effective technique for the relief of severe stress urinary
incontinence, for both patients with urethral hipermobility and with intrinsic
sphincteric deficiency, having a cure rate of 88.7%. The high frequency
of postoperative voiding urgency was not related to the detrusor overactivity
as evaluated by urodynamic studies.
Key
words: urinary incontinence, stress; urodynamics; surgical technique;
pubovaginal sling
Int Braz J Urol. 2003; 29: 540-544
INTRODUCTION
Since
the beginning of the 20th century, using a series of materials, sling
procedure has been described for the treatment of female urinary incontinence
(1). The use of a strip of rectus fascia beneath the bladder neck by a
vaginal incision and anchored superiorly in the abdominal wall was proposed
by Aldrige in 1942 (2).
Sling attachment to the abdominal aponeurosis
would provide its movement with the abdominal wall during the increase
of the intra-abdominal pressure. During cough or sneeze, the outwards
movement of the abdominal wall would draw the sling upwards with consequent
increase of the urethral pressure (2). More recent studies have shown
that the endopelvic fascia has an important function in giving support
to the urethra during stress (3,4). Thus, the suburethral sling, instead
of raising and actively compressing urethra during the effort, would act
in a similar way as the endopelvic fascia, supporting the urethra and
making a passive resistance of urethra possible during the increase of
intra-abdominal pressure (1).
Traditionally, slings have been indicated
for the treatment of the recurrent stress incontinence, especially in
patients who presented a scarred and fixed urethra leading to a defective
urethral sphincter function and lower maximum urethral closure pressure
(1). The indication of sling as the first choice for all stress incontinence
cases leads to about 90% of cure (5). These high rates of success of the
suburethral sling for the treatment of stress incontinence are associated
with the new pathophysiological concepts of the stress incontinence. The
development of less invasive techniques with synthetic material has been
responsible for the renovated interest in the use of sling for the treatment
of the female urinary incontinence.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the
pubovaginal sling technique with rectus fascia for the treatment of stress
incontinence, comparing the results in patients with urethral hypermobility
to those with intrinsic sphincteric deficiency.
MATERIALS
AND METHODS
Sixty-two
patients ranging in age from 22 to 73 year-old (mean = 49.6 ± 12.2)
were prospectively studied, with diagnosis of stress incontinence and
submitted to surgical treatment using the pubovaginal sling with rectus
fascia between the period of August/1999 and August/2002.
All patients provided a detailed history,
which included an incontinence impact questionnaire to assess the impact
in quality of life before treatment, physical examination, urine culture,
and urinalysis. The objective quantification of the severity of incontinence
was done by the mean stress leaking point pressure in the urodynamic study.
All patients were assessed preoperatively by a multichannel urodynamic
study that included flowmetry, postvoid residual volume measurement by
urethral catheter, and a cystometrogram. Valsalva leak point pressure
was assessed by visual examination of the urethral meatus at the time
of a Valsalva maneuver with the bladder filled to the volume of first
desire to void (average 220 mL). An urodynamic study was performed, postoperatively,
during the period of 3 to 6 months in all cases.
Surgical
Technique
1) Patient
placed in the dorsal lithotomy position under peridural anesthesia; 2)
Transversal suprapubic incision for withdrawal of the rectus fascia strip
with dimension of 10 x 2 cm; 3) Closure of the aponeurosis with 1-VicrylÒ
thread; 4) Preparation of the strip tying both edges with 0-ProleneÒ,
leaving the wire with long extremities; 5) Use of a Foley catheter to
empty the bladder; 6) Submucosal saline injection on the anterior vaginal
wall; 7) Longitudinal incision of the anterior vaginal wall 2 cm distant
from the urethral orifice; 8) Dissection of the vaginal mucosa until identification
of the retropubic space; 9) Positioning of the strip of rectus fascia
with aid of the Raz’s needle around the middle urethra; 10) Maintenance
of the strip without tension through approach of wires in the mid plan;
11) Closure of both vaginal mucosa and skin.
The procedures associated with sling were
colpoperineoplasty in 41 patients (66.1%), vaginal hysterectomy in 3 patients
(4.8%) and tubal ligation in 3 patients (4.8%). The mean follow-up of
the patients was 24.8 ± 7.1 months, ranging from 3 to 38 months.
To evaluate significant differences between
the groups, the c2 test and Fischer’s exact test were used. The
level of significance was set at p < 0.05.
RESULTS
The
mean parity of the patients was 4.1 ± 3.1 childbirths (range 0
- 14 childbirths) and 11 patients (17.8%) presented previous cesarean
sections; 13 (21%) cases had already been previously submitted to surgery
for correction of urinary incontinence. The operative procedure was Burch
procedure in 8 (12.9%) patients and anterior repair in 5 (8.1%) patients.
The preoperative urodynamic studies showed
genuine stress incontinence in 59 patients (95.2%) and mixed incontinence
in 3 patients (4.8%). These 3 patients had already been submitted to medical
treatment. Voiding urgency was present in 36 patients (58.1%) prior to
surgery. The mean stress leaking point pressure in the preoperative urodynamic
study was 73.2 ± 34.6 cm of H2O (11 - 150 cm of H2O).
Patients were divided into two groups: 1)
Group 1: patients with diagnosis of urethral hypermobility with a Valsalva
leak point pressure equal or superior to 60 cm of H2O (n = 39; 62.9%),
2) Group 2: patients with diagnosis of intrinsic sphincteric deficiency
presenting a Valsalva leak point pressure below 60 cm of H2O (n = 23;
37.1%).
No significant differences in relation to
age, parity or presence of pelvic floor defects, as cystocele, rectocele,
enterocele or perineal rupture, were noticed in the two groups of patients.
The only difference between the patients with urethral hypermobility and
those with intrinsic sphincteric deficiency was the stress leaking-point
pressure, 91.7 and 41.7 cm H2O respectively (p < 0.001) (Table-1).
Ten patients (16.5%) presented postoperative
urinary retention, 3 (4.8%) of them needed suprapubic cystostomy. Twenty
patients (32.2%) had shown micturitional urgency, 12 of them (19.3%) presented
persistent micturitional urgency and 8 patients (12.9%) “de novo”
micturitional urgency. The postoperative urodynamic study has shown no
inhibited contractions of the detrusor in only 7 patients (11.3%).
Seven patients (11.3%) persisted with stress
urinary incontinence, which was confirmed by the postoperative urodynamic
study. There was no statistical difference between the mean stress leaking
point pressure in the preoperative and postoperative urodynamic study
of these patients (63 ± 10.8 cm versus 56 ± 14.3 cm of H2O,
p = 0.354).
No statistical difference was observed between
patients with urethral hypermobility and those with intrinsic sphincteric
deficiency concerning urinary retention, need of postoperative cystostomy,
“de novo” and persistent micturitional urgency and postoperative
subjective stress urinary incontinence nor in the urodynamic study findings
of detrusor overactivity or stress incontinence (Table-2). The average
hospitalization time was of 3.1 ± 0.9 days for the two groups of
patients. As it can be noticed, there was no difference between any of
the analyzed parameters in the two groups of patients.
DISCUSSION
The
comparison of the results after sling procedures is difficult since the
studies evaluate populations of different patients, especially those with
recurrent stress urinary incontinence and the series of comparative studies
are so small. The objective cure rate was 88.7% whereas the subjective
cure rate was 84.1%, comparable to the literature data that showed objective
cure rates from 61 to 100% and subjective cure rates from 73 to 93% (1).
Some authors had shown better rates of objective
and subjective cure, besides fewer incidences of complications, with the
surgery of Burch (6). A review comparing the treatment of the stress urinary
incontinence by sling to other techniques such as abdominal and laparoscopic
colposuspension, suspension with needle and anterior repair showed no
significant differences (7).
There is little data regarding the long-term
results. The recurrence of symptoms, when present, usually occurs in the
first six months, and is usually secondary to the degeneration of the
strip or loss of the sutures. After this period the success of the surgery
is known to last for many years (8,9). The mean follow-up of our patients
was 24.8 ± 7.1 months (3 - 38 months). The results of sling in
the treatment of urethral deficiency and urethral hypermobility in a long
follow-up, with a mean time of 42 months (0.5 - 134 months) have shown
a rate of objective cure of 97% and voiding dysfunction of 41%. Improvement
of the quality of life occurred in 88% and improvement of the urinary
continence occurred in 84% of the patients. When asked if they would submit
to this procedure again, 82% of patients answered yes (10).
There is a current concept that suburethral
sling is more obstructive than the other techniques for treatment of stress
urinary incontinence. In this study, 10 patients (16.5%) presented postoperative
urinary retention, and 3 (4.8%) of them had a suprapubic cistostomy done.
The incidence of urinary retention varies from 2.2 to 16%, and from 1.5
to 7.8% of the patients that need autocatheterism (11). There is a tendency
to gradually reduce the tension of the strip in the sling, diminishing
the obstructive character of the procedure with consequent improvement
of the voiding difficulties and the postoperative instability of the detrusor
(1,12). There are proposals of methods that assist in the adjustment of
the strip, as the use of a swab in urethra and evaluation of its angulation
(13).
The incidence of postoperative voiding urgency
varies from 3 to 30%, being the detrusor overactivity evidenced in 7%
of the patients (14). Twenty patients (32.2%) had presented micturitional
urgency, 8 of them (12.9%) had “de novo” micturitional urgency.
The urodynamic study evidenced no inhibited contractions of the detrusor
in only 7 patients (11.3%). This may indicate that the micturitional urgency
is not caused by detrusor overactivity in the majority of the cases.
An important factor in the comparison of
results of the sling surgery among different surgeons is the variability
of the technique. Questionnaires answered by surgeons have shown discordance
rates of 42% in the type of material used, 19% in the dimensions of the
strip and 19% in the method used for traction. The only factor with less
variability was the point of attachment of the sling (15). This can explain
the discrepancies observed in the results reported by different groups
and the different technical options for the treatment of the stress urinary
incontinence.
CONCLUSION
We
concluded that the pubovaginal sling is an effective technique for the
treatment of female stress urinary incontinence, for patients both with
urethral hypermobility and with intrinsic sphincteric deficiency, with
an 88.7% of cure rate. The high frequency of postoperative voiding urgency
is not related to the detrusor overactivity evaluated by urodynamic studies.
REFERENCES
- Bidmead J, Cardozo L: Sling techniques in the treatment of genuine
stress incontinence. BJOG. 2000; 107: 147-56.
- Aldridge AH: Transplantation of fascia for the relief of urinary incontinence.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1942; 44: 398-411.
- DeLancey JOL: Structural support of the urethra as it relates to
stress urinary incontinence: the hammock hypothesis. Am J Obstet Gynecol.
1994; 170: 1713-23.
- Zacharin RF: Abdomino-perineal suspension in the management of recurrent
stress incontinence of urine – a 15 years experience. Obstet Gynecol.
1989; 96: 213-20.
- Chaikin D, Rosenthal J, Blaivas G: Pubovaginal fascial sling for
all types of stress urinary incontinence: long term analysis. J Urol.
1998; 160: 1312-6.
- Maher CF, Dwyer PL, Carey MP, Moran PA: Colposuspension or sling
for low urethral pressure stress incontinence? Int Urogynecol J Pelvic
Floor Dysfunct. 1999; 10: 384-9.
- Bezerra CA, Bruschini H: Suburethral sling operations for urinary
incontinence in women. Cochrane library, Issue 1, 2002.
- Jarvis GJ: Stress Incontinence. In: Mundy AR, Stephenson TP, Wein
AJ (eds.). Urodynamics: Principles, Practice and Application. New York,
Chuchill Livingstone. 2nd ed, 1994, pp. 299-326.
- Morgan JE, Heritz DM, Stewart FE, Connolly JC, Farrow GA: The polypropylene
pubovaginal sling for treatment of recurrent stress urinary incontinence.
J Urol. 1995; 154: 1013-5.
- Richter HE, Varner RE, Sanders E, Holley RL, Northen A, Cliver SP:
Effects of pubovaginal sling procedure on patients with urethral hypermobility
and intrinsic sphincteric deficiency: would they do it again? Am J Obstet
Gynecol. 2001; 184: 14-9.
- Ghonheim G, Shaaban A: Suburethral slings for the treatment of stress
urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 1994;
5: 228-39.
- Appell R: Primary slings for everyone with genuine stress incontinence?
The argument for. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 1998; 9: 249-51.
- Nguyen A, Mahoney S, Minor L, Ghoniem G: A simple objective method
of adjusting sling tension. J Urol. 1999; 162:1674-6.
- Leach G, Dmochowski R, Appell R, Blaivas JG, Hadley HR, Luber KM,
et al.: Female stress urinary incontinence clinical guidelines panel
summary report on surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence.
J Urol. 1997; 158: 875-80.
- Walter AJ, Buller JL, Davis G: Variability of reported techniques
for performance of the pubovaginal sling procedure. Int Urogynecol J
Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2002; 13: 160-4.
_____________________
Received: June 26, 2003
Accepted after revision: October 24, 2003
_______________________
Correspondence address:
Dr. Agnaldo Lopes da Silva Filho
Avenida Pasteur, 89 / 1310
Belo Horizonte, MG, 30150 290, Brazil
E-mail: agsilvaf@terra.com.br
|