Imaging of Urethral Bulking Agents

Chapter

Abstract

Urethral bulking is an office procedure for treatment of stress urinary incontinence that has increased in popularity in recent years. Numerous types of urethral bulking agents (UBAs) have been used since its first introduction in the 1930s.

Ultrasound imaging has made it possible to clearly visualize the implanted UBAs and anatomic location of those agents. Typically, these agents are imaged using specialty 3D 360° field-of-view transducers. Urethral bulking can be readily imaged with transducers commonly found in most ultrasound departments. However, a sonographer, during a pelvic or renal examination, may inadvertently find and image an echogenic structure near the urethrovesical junction in patients with a history of urethral bulking. Familiarizing oneself with the sonographic appearance of UBAs and optimizing techniques to obtain improved images of these agents may eliminate the need for additional imaging for the patient.

In this chapter, we will focus on the sonographic characteristics of UBAs and on knowing when and how to use appropriate probes to image the urethra. We will also describe the use of 2D/3D perineal and 3D endovaginal ultrasound imaging in the assessment of urethral bulking. Normal anatomy, ultrasound techniques, and equipment will be briefly reviewed. The use of 3D endovaginal imaging to identify and describe the location and distribution of UBAs following uncomplicated transurethral injection will be covered as well.

Keywords

Genitourinary ultrasound Pelvic floor imaging Synthetic implanted materials 3-Dimensional endovaginal sonography 

References

  1. 1.
    Hegde A, Smith AL, Aguilar VC, Davila GW. Three-dimensional endovaginal ultrasound examination following injection of macroplastique for stress urinary incontinence: outcomes based on location and periurethral distribution of the bulking agent. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(7):1151–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kerr LA. Bulking agents in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence: history, outcomes, patient populations, and reimbursement profile. Rev Urol. 2005;7(S1):S3–S11.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    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 Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2010;21(12):1479–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Quackels R. Two cases of incontinence after adenomectomy cured by paraffine injection into the perineum. Acta Urol Belg. 1955;23(3):259–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mayer RD, Dmochowski RR, Appell RA, Sand PK, Klimberg IW, Jacoby K, Graham CW, Snyder JA, Nitti VW, Winters JC. Multicenter prospective randomized 52-week trial of calcium hydroxylapatite versus bovine dermal collagen for treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Urology. 2007;69(5):876–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ghoniem G, Corcos J, Comiter C, Bernhard P, Westney OL, Herschorn S. Cross-linked polydimethylsiloxane injection for female stress urinary incontinence: results of a multicenter, randomized, controlled, single-blind study. J Urol. 2009;181(1):204–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Davila W. Nonsurgical outpatient therapies for the management of female stress urinary incontinence: long-term effectiveness and durability (review). Adv Urol. 2011;2011:176498.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wieczorek AP, Wozniak MM, Stankiewicz A, Santoro GA, Bogusiewicz M, Rechberger T. 3-D high-frequency endovaginal ultrasound of female urethral complex and assessment of inter-observer reliability. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(1):e7–e12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hegde A, Willy Davila G. Endovaginal imaging of vaginal implants. In: Shobeiri SA, editor. Practical pelvic ultrasonography: a multicompartmental approach to 2d/3d/4d ultrasonography of pelvic floor. 1st ed. New York: Springer; 2014.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Koelbl H, Saz V, Doerfler D, Haeusler G, Sam C, Hanzal E. Transurethral injection of silicone microimplants for intrinsic urethral sphincter deficiency. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;92(3):332–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maher C, O’Reilly B, Dwyer P, Carey M, Cornish A. Schluter Pubovaginal sling versus transurethral Macroplastique for stress urinary incontinence and intrinsic sphincter deficiency: a prospective randomised controlled trial. BJOG. 2005;112(6):797–801.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Radley S, Chapple C, Mitsogiannis I, Glass K. Transurethral implantation of Macroplastique for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence secondary to urethral sphincter deficiency. Eur Urol. 2001;39(4):383–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tamanini J, D’Ancona C, Tadini V, Netto N. Macroplastique implantation system for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. J Urol. 2003;169(6):2229–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tamanini J, D’Ancona C, Netto N. Macroplastique implantation system for female stress urinary incontinence: long-term follow-up. J Endourol. 2006;20(12):1082–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    ter Meulen PH, Berghmans LC, Nieman FH, van Kerrebroeck PE. Effects of macroplastique implantation system for stress urinary incontinence and urethral hypermobility in women. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunc. 2009;20(2):177–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zullo M, Plotti F, Bellati F, Muzii L, Angioli R, Panici P. Transurethral polydimethylsiloxane implantation: a valid option for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence due to intrinsic sphincter deficiency without urethral hypermobility. J Urol. 2005;173(3):898–902.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rovner E, Goudelocke C. Which injectable to use in the treatment of intrinsic sphincter deficiency? Curr Opin Urol. 2010;20(4):296–301.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Smith T, Chang D, Dmochowski R, Hilton P, Nilsson CG, Reid FM, Rovner E. (2005) Surgery for urinary incontinence in women. In: Abrams P, Cardozo L, Khoury S, Wein, editors. Incontinence: 4th International Consultation on Incontinence, Paris July 5–8, 2008. Plymouth UK: Health Publications; 2009. P. 1121–90Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chapple C, Wein AJ, Brubaker L, Dmochowski R, Espuna PM, Haab F, Simon H. Stress incontinence injection therapy: what is best for our patients? Eur Urol. 2005;48(4):552–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lightner D, Rovner E, Corcos J, Payne C, Brubaker L, Drutz H, Steinhoff G, Zuidex Study Group. Randomized controlled multisite trial of injected bulking agents for women with intrinsic sphincter deficiency: mid-urethral injection of Zuidex via the implacer versus proximal urethral injection of contigen cystoscopically. Urology. 2009;74(4):771–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    DeFreitas G, Wilson T, Zimmern P, Forte T. Three dimensional ultrasonography: an objective outcome tool to assess collagen distribution in women with stress urinary incontinence. Urology. 2003;62(2):232–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Poon CI, Zimmern PE. Role of three-dimensional ultrasound in assessment of women undergoing urethral bulking agent therapy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2004;16(5):411–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Santoro GA, Wieczorek AP, Dietz HP, Melligren A, Sultan AH, Shobeiri SA, et al. State of the art: an integrated approach to pelvic floor ultrasonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;37(4):381–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Denson L, Shobeiri SA. Imaging of urethral bulking agents: a sonographer’s perspective. J Diagn Med Sonogrphy. 2013;29(6):255–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Benshushan A, Brzezinski A, Shoshani O, Rojansky N. Periurethral injection for the treatment of urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1998;53(6):383–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Khullar V, Cardozo LD, Abbott D, Hillard T, Norman S, Bourne T. The mechanism of continence achieved with GAX collagen as determined by ultrasound (abstract). Neurourol Urodyn. 1993;12(4):439–40.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Monga AK, Stanton SL. Urodynamics: prediction, outcome and analysis of mechanism for cure of stress incontinence by periurethral collagen. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104(2):158–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Elia G, Bergman A. Periurethral collagen implant: ultrasound assessment and prediction of outcome. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 1996;7(6):335–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Poon CI, Zimmern PE, Wilson TS, Defreitas GA, Foreman MR. Three-dimensional ultrasonography to assess long-term durability of periurethral collagen in women with stress urinary incontinence due to intrinsic sphincter deficiency. Urology. 2005;65(1):60–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Shobeiri, SA, Yune JJ, Quiroz L, Siddighi S, Nihira MA. Transurethral bulking agent location and distribution: A 3D ultrasound analysis (abstract). International Continence Society 43rd Annual Meeting, 29–30 Aug 2013, Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aparna Hegde
    • 1
  • G. Willy Davila
    • 2
  • S. Abbas Shobeiri
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Center for Urogynecology and Pelvic Health (C.U.P)New DelhiIndia
  2. 2.Section of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Gynecology FloridaThe Cleveland ClinicWestonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyGynecologic Subspecialties, INOVA Women’s Hospital, Virginia Commonwealth UniversityFalls ChurchUSA
  4. 4.Department of BioengineeringGeorge Mason UniversityFairfaxUSA

Personalised recommendations