Advertisement

International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 30, Issue 2, pp 245–250 | Cite as

Outcomes of stress urinary incontinence in women undergoing TOT versus Burch colposuspension with abdominal sacrocolpopexy

  • George LazarouEmail author
  • Evelyn Minis
  • Bogdan Grigorescu
Original Article

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

To compare postoperative rates of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in patients with pelvic organ prolapse and SUI undergoing abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) with Burch colposuspension or a transobturator tape (TOT) sling.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, medical records of 117 patients who underwent ASC with Burch (n = 60) or TOT (n = 57) between 2008 and 2010 at NYU Winthrop Hospital were assessed. Preoperative evaluation included history, physical examination, cough stress test (CST), and multichannel urodynamic studies (MUDS). Primary outcomes were postoperative continence at follow-up up to 12 weeks. Patients considered incontinent reported symptoms of SUI and had a positive CST or MUDS. Secondary outcomes included intra- and postoperative complications. Associations were analyzed by Fisher’s exact, McNemar’s and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests.

Results

The groups were similar regarding age, BMI, parity, Valsalva leak point pressure (VLPP), and prior abdominal surgery (p = 0.07–0.76). They differed regarding preoperative SUI diagnosed by self-reported symptoms, CST, or MUDS (TOT 89.5–94.7%, Burch 60.7–76.3%, p < 0.0001–0.007). The TOT group had lower rates of postoperative SUI (TOT 12.5%, Burch 30%, OR = 0.15, 95% CI 0.04, 0.62). Relative risk reduction (RRR) in postoperative SUI for the TOT group compared with the Burch group was 79%–86%. There were no differences concerning intra- and postoperative complications. The Burch group had a higher rate of reoperation for persistent/recurrent SUI (Burch 25%, TOT 12% p = 0.078).

Conclusions

The TOT group experienced a greater reduction in postoperative incontinence, and the Burch group underwent more repeat surgeries. The TOT sling may be superior in patients undergoing concomitant ASC.

Keywords

Abdominal sacral colpopexy Burch colposuspension Pelvic organ prolapse Stress urinary incontinence Transobturator tape sling 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to Dr. Anthony Vintzileos for his support and Dr. Salma Rahimi for her assistance with data collection.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Haylen BT, de Ridder D, Freeman RM, Swift SE, Berghmans B, et al. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21:5–26.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-0976-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bai SW, Jeon MJ, Kim JY, Chung KA, Kim SK, Park KH. Relationship between stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2002;13(4):256.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s001920200053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Schmid C. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:CD004014.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004014.pub5.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ghoniem G, Hammett J. Female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery practice patterns: IUGA member survey. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(10):1489–94.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-015-2734-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davila GW, Ghoniem GM, Kapoor DS, Contreras-Ortiz O. Pelvic floor dysfunction management practice patterns: a survey of members of the international urogynecological association. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2002;13(5):319–25.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s001920200069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brubaker L, Cundiff G, Fine P, et al. A randomized trial of colpopexy and urinary reduction efforts (CARE): design and methods. Control Clin Trials. 2003;24(5):629–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cosson M, Boukerrou M, Narducci F, Occelli B, Querleu D, Crépin G. Long-term results of the Burch procedure combined with abdominal sacrocolpopexy for treatment of vault prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2003;14(2):104–7.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-002-1028-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brubaker L, Cundiff GW, Fine P, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy with Burch colposuspension to reduce urinary stress incontinence. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(15):1557–66.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa054208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burgio KL, Nygaard IE, Richter HE, et al. Bladder symptoms 1 year after abdominal sacrocolpopexy with and without Burch colposuspension in women without preoperative stress incontinence symptoms. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(6):647.e1-6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2007.08.048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brubaker L, Nygaard I, Richter HE, et al. Two-year outcomes after sacrocolpopexy with and without Burch to prevent stress urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112(1):49–55.  https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181778d2a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Costantini E, Lazzeri M, Bini V, Del Zingaro M, Zucchi A, Porena M. Burch colposuspension does not provide any additional benefit to pelvic organ prolapse repair in patients with urinary incontinence: a randomized surgical trial. J Urol. 2008;180(3):1007–12.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.05.023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Costantini E, Lazzeri M, Bini V, Del Zingaro M, Frumenzio E, Porena M. Pelvic organ prolapse repair with and without concomitant Burch colposuspension in incontinent women: a randomized controlled trial with at least 5-year followup. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2012;2012:967923.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/967923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lapitan MC, Cody JD. Open retropubic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;2:CD002912.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002912.pub6.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Holdø B, Verelst M, Svenningsen R, Milsom I, Skjeldestad FE. Long-term clinical outcomes with the retropubic tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) procedure compared to Burch colposuspension for correcting stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28(11):1739–46.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3345-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ford AA, Rogerson L, Cody JD, Aluko P, Ogah JA. Mid-urethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;7:CD006375.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006375.pub4.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Trabuco EC, Linder BJ, Klingele CJ, Blandon RE, Occhino JA, Weaver AL, et al. Two-year results of Burch compared with midurethral sling with sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131(1):31–8.  https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Delorme E. Transobturator urethral suspension: mini-invasive procedure in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women. Prog Urol. 2001;11(6):1306–13.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Burch JC. Urethrovaginal fixation to Cooper’s ligament for correction of stress incontinence, cystocele, and prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1961;81:281–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nygaard I, Brubaker L, Zyczynski HM, Cundiff G, Richter H, Gantz M, et al. Long-term outcomes following abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. JAMA. 2013;309(19):2016–24.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.4919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Trabuco EC, Klingele CJ, Blandon RE, Occhino JA, Weaver AL, McGree ME, et al. Burch retropubic urethropexy compared with midurethral sling with concurrent sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(4):828–35.  https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000001651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Magon N, Chopra SVSM. Transobturator tape in treatment of stress urinary incontinence: it is time for a new gold standard. North Am J Med Sci. 2012;4(5):226–30.  https://doi.org/10.4103/1947-2714.95905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mayekar RV, Bhosale AA, Kandhari KV, Nandanwar YS, Shaikh SS. A study of transobturator tape in stress urinary incontinence. Urol Ann. 2017;9(1):9–12.  https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-7796.198867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Abdel-Fattah M, Cao G, Mostafa A. Long-term outcomes for transobturator tension-free vaginal tapes in women with urodynamic mixed urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36(4):902–8.  https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Al-Zahrani AA, Gajewski J. Long-term patient satisfaction after retropubic and transobturator mid-urethral slings for female stress urinary incontinence. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2016;42(9):1180–5.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jog.13035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Leone Roberti Maggiore U, Finazzi Agrò E, Soligo M, Li Marzi V, Digesu A, Serati M. Long-term outcomes of TOT and TVT procedures for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28(8):1119–30.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3275-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Moon YJ, Jeon MJ, Kim SK, Bai SW. Comparison of Burch colposuspension and transoturator tape when combined with abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2011;112(2):122–5.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2010.08.017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Law TSM, Cheung RYK, Chung TKH, Chan SSC. Efficacy and outcomes of transobturator tension-free vaginal tape with or without concomitant pelvic floor repair surgery for urinary stress incontinence: five-year follow-up. Hong Kong Med J. 2015;21(4):333–8.  https://doi.org/10.12809/hkmj144397.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jeon MJ, Kim JY, Moon YJ, Bai SW, Yoo EH. Two-year urinary outcomes of sacrocolpopexy with or without transobturator tape: results of a prolapse reduction stress test-based approach. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25(11):1517–22.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2410-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Richardson ML, Elliot CS, Shaw JG, Comiter CV, Chen B, Sokol ER. To sling or not to sling at time of abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a cost-effective analysis. J Urol. 2013;190(4):1306–12.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.03.046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tubre RW, Padmanabhan P, Frilot CF, Porta W, Gomelsky A. Outcomes of three sling procedures at the time of abdominal sacral colpopexy. Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36(2):482–5.  https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.22959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecological Association 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • George Lazarou
    • 1
    Email author
  • Evelyn Minis
    • 1
  • Bogdan Grigorescu
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Women’s HealthNYU Winthrop HospitalMineolaUSA

Personalised recommendations