Traditional suburethral sling operations for urinary incontinence in women

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_REHMAN_Traditional_suburethral_sling_operations_for_urinary_incontinence_in_2017.PDF (1.21 MB)
Citações na Scopus
37
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2017
Editora
WILEY
DOI
Indexadores
Scopus
Web of Science
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Autores
REHMAN, Haroon
BEZERRA, Carlos A.
CODY, June D.
ALUKO, Patricia
Autor de Grupo de pesquisa
Editores
Coordenadores
Organizadores
Citação
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, n.7, article ID CD001754, 138p, 2017
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Background Stress urinary incontinence constitutes a significant health and economic burden to society. Traditional suburethral slings are one of the surgical operations used to treat women with symptoms of stress urinary incontinence. Objectives To determine the effects of traditional suburethral slings on stress ormixed incontinence in comparison with other management options. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register (searched 3 June 2010) and the reference lists of relevant articles. Selection criteria Randomised or quasi-randomised trials that included traditional suburethral slings for the treatment of stress or mixed urinary incontinence. Data collection and analysis At least three reviewers independently extracted data fromincluded trials onto a standard form and assessed trial methodological quality. The data abstracted were relevant to predetermined outcome measures. Where appropriate, we calculated a summary statistic: a relative risk for dichotomous data and a weighted mean difference for continuous data. Main results We included 26 trials involving 2284 women. The quality of evidence was moderate for most trials and there was generally short followup ranging from 6 to 24 months. One medium-sized trial compared traditional suburethral sling operations with oxybutynin in the treatment of women with mixed urinary incontinence. Surgery appeared to be more effective than drugs in treating participant-reported incontinence (n = 75, risk ratio (RR) 0.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08 to 0.43). One trial found that traditional slings were more effective than transurethral injectable treatment (RR for clinician-assessed incontinence within a year 0.21, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.21) Seven trials compared slings with open abdominal retropubic colposuspension. Participant-reported incontinence was lower with the slings after one year (RR0.75, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.90), but not when assessed by clinicians. Colposuspension, however, was associated with fewer peri-operative complications, shorter duration of use of indwelling catheter and less long-term voiding dysfunction. One study showed there was a 20% lower risk of bladder perforation with the sling procedure but a 50% increase in urinary tract infection with the sling procedure compared with colposuspension. Fewer women developed prolapse after slings (compared with after colposuspension) in two small trials but this did not reach statistical significance. Twelve trials addressed the comparison between traditional sling operations and minimally invasive sling operations. These seemed to be equally effective in the short term (RR for incontinence within first year 0.97, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.20) but minimally invasive slings had a shorter operating time, fewer peri-operative complications (other than bladder perforation) and some evidence of less postoperative voiding dysfunction and detrusor symptoms. Six trials compared one type of traditional sling with another. Materials included porcine dermis, lyophilised dura mater, fascia lata, vaginal wall, autologous dermis and rectus fascia. Participant-reported improvement rates within the first year favoured the traditional autologous material rectus fascia over other biological materials (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.98). There were more complications with the use of non-absorbable Gore-Tex in one trial. Data for comparison of bladder neck needle suspension with suburethral slings were inconclusive because they came from a single trial with a small specialised population. No trials compared traditional suburethral slings with anterior repair, laparoscopic retropubic colposuspension or artificial sphincters. Most trials did not distinguish between women having surgery for primary or recurrent incontinence when reporting participant characteristics. For most of the comparisons, clinically important differences could not be ruled out. Authors' conclusions Traditional slings seem to be as effective as minimally invasive slings, but had higher rates of adverse effects. This should be interpreted with some caution however, as the quality of evidence for the studies was variable, follow-up short and populations small, particularly for identifying complication rates. Tradional sling procedures appeared to confer a similar cure rate in comparison to open retropubic colposuspension, but the long-term adverse event profile is still unclear. A brief economic commentary (BEC) identified two studies suggesting that traditional slings may be more cost-effective compared with collagen injection but not cost-effective when compared with minimally invasive sling operations. Reliable evidence to clarify whether or not traditional suburethral slings may be better or worse than other surgical or conservative management options is lacking.
Palavras-chave
Suburethral Slings, Polytetrafluoroethylene [therapeutic use], Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Urinary Incontinence [drug therapy, surgery], Urinary Incontinence, Stress [drug therapy, surgery], Adult, Female, Humans
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/24169
Referências
  1. Abdel-Fattah M, 2004, EUR UROL, V46, P629, DOI 10.1016/j.eururo.2004.07.013
  2. Abdel-Fattah M, 2002, P 27 ANN M INT UR AS
  3. Abrams P, 2000, P INT CONT SOC ICS 3, pA173
  4. Albo M, 2007, J UROLOGY, V177, P1810, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2007.01.032
  5. Albo ME, 2007, NEW ENGL J MED, V356, P2143, DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa070416
  6. Amaro JL, 2007, J UROLOGY, V177, P482
  7. Amat LL, 2007, INT UROGYNECOL J, V18, pS128
  8. Arunkalaivanan AS, 2003, INT UROGYNECOL J, V14, P17, DOI 10.1007/s00192-002-1000-9
  9. Arunkalaivanan AS, 2001, INT UROGYNECOLOGY S3, V12, pS21
  10. Atherton M. J., 2000, Neurourology and Urodynamics, V19, P396
  11. Bai SW, 2005, INT J GYNECOL OBSTET, V91, P246, DOI 10.1016/j.ijgo.2005.08.023
  12. Barbalias G, 1997, EUR UROL, V31, P394
  13. Barrington JW, 2003, P BARD SAT S INT CON, V8
  14. Basok EK, 2008, UROL INT, V80, P46, DOI 10.1159/000111729
  15. Berman CJ, 1997, J UROLOGY, V157, P122, DOI 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)65302-3
  16. Birnbaum HG, 2004, PHARMACOECONOMICS, V22, P95, DOI 10.2165/00019053-200422020-00003
  17. Blaivas JG, 1997, NEUROUROL URODYNAM, V16, P149, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6777(1997)16:3<149::AID-NAU3>3.0.CO;2-E
  18. BLAIVAS JG, 1988, J UROLOGY, V139, P727
  19. Brubaker L, 2009, NEUROUROL URODYNAM, V28, P268, DOI 10.1002/nau.20698
  20. Brubaker L, 2009, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V200, DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.11.017
  21. Bruschini H, 2005, P INT CONT SOC ICS 3
  22. Chai T, 2007, P 37 ANN M INT CONT
  23. Chai TC, 2009, J UROLOGY, V181, P2192, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2009.01.019
  24. Choe JM, 2000, J UROLOGY, V163, P1829, DOI 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67553-2
  25. Choe JM, 2003, ADV EXP MED BIOL, V539, P481
  26. Choe JM, 2001, P INT CONTINENCE SOC
  27. Chong C, 2003, SINGAPORE J OBSTE S1, V34, P55
  28. Chong Erin C, 2011, Curr Urol Rep, V12, P358, DOI 10.1007/s11934-011-0209-x
  29. Cody J, 2003, Health Technol Assess, V7, P1
  30. Corcos J, 2005, UROLOGY, V65, P898, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2004.11.054
  31. Corcos Jacques, 2001, Journal of Urology, V165, P198
  32. Culligan PJ, 2003, INT UROGYNECOL J PEL, V14, P229, DOI 10.1007/s00192-003-1057-0
  33. Culligan PJ, 1998, P INT CONT SOC ICS 2, P133
  34. Daneshgari F, 2008, J UROLOGY, V180, P1890, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2008.07.029
  35. Daneshgari Firouz, 2007, Eur Urol, V52, P1794, DOI 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.09.025
  36. Darai E, 2007, EUR UROL, V51, P795, DOI 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.08.046
  37. David-Montefiore E, 2006, EUR UROL, V49, P133, DOI 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.09.019
  38. David-Montefiore E, 2006, INT UROGYNECOL J S2, V17, pS95
  39. Dean NM, 2006, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002/14651828.CD002239.pub2
  40. Debodinance P., 1994, Journal de Gynecologie Obstetrique et Biologie de la Reproduction, V23, P665
  41. DEBODINANCE P, 1993, EUR J OBSTET GYN R B, V52, P35, DOI 10.1016/0028-2243(93)90222-X
  42. Debodinance Ph., 2000, Journal de Gynecologie Obstetrique et Biologie de la Reproduction, V29, P148
  43. Demirci F, 2001, Arch Gynecol Obstet, V265, P190, DOI 10.1007/s004040000159
  44. Demirci F, 2000, INT UROGYNECOLOGY S1, V11, pS48
  45. Diokno AC, 2007, NEUROUROL URODYNAM, V26, P745
  46. ENZELSBERGER H, 1993, GEBURTSH FRAUENHEILK, V53, P467, DOI 10.1055/s-2007-1022915
  47. Enzelsberger H, 1996, OBSTET GYNECOL, V88, P251, DOI 10.1016/0029-7844(96)00193-7
  48. Fantl JA, 1996, AHCPR PUBLICATION, V96-0682, P1
  49. Fischer JR, 2001, INT UROGYNECOL J, V12, pS33
  50. FitzGerald MP, 2007, PHYS THER, V87, P1316, DOI 10.2522/ptj.20060073
  51. Giri SK, 2006, J UROLOGY, V175, P1788, DOI 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)01023-2
  52. Giri SK, 2004, IRISH J MED SCI S1, V173, P18
  53. Giri SK, 2005, P INT CONT SCI ICS 3
  54. Glazener CM, 2001, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD001755
  55. Glazener CM, 2004, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD003636.PUB2
  56. Goldberg RP, 2001, P INT CONTINENCE SOC
  57. Goldberg RP, 2001, INT UROGYNECOLOGY S1, V12, pS6
  58. Guerrero K, 2008, NEUROUROL URODYNAM, V27, P571
  59. Guerrero K, 2007, INT UROGYNECOL J, V18, P1263, DOI 10.1007/s00192-007-0307-y
  60. Halaska M, 2001, NEUROUROL URODYNAM, V20, P421
  61. Han WHC, 2001, INT UROGYNECOLOGY S3, V12, pS23
  62. HENRIKSSON L, 1978, UROL INT, V33, P111
  63. HENRIKSSON L, 1978, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V131, P77
  64. Higgins JP, 2008, COCHRANE HDB SYSTEMA
  65. Higgins JPT, 2003, BRIT MED J, V327, P557, DOI 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
  66. HILTON P, 1989, BRIT J OBSTET GYNAEC, V96, P213, DOI 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1989.tb01665.x
  67. Hilton P, 2002, UK NATL RES REGISTER
  68. Hung MJ, 2001, INT UROGYNECOLOGY S3, V12, P253
  69. Hunskaar S, 2001, INC 2 INT CONS INC R
  70. Ishenko AI, 1999, EUROPEAN J OBSTET GY, V86, pS15
  71. Jackson S, 1996, BRIT J UROL, V77, P805, DOI 10.1046/j.1464-410X.1996.00186.x
  72. Keegan PE, 2007, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD003881.pub2
  73. Kenton K, 2008, P 38 ANN M INT CONT
  74. Kilonzo M, 2004, INT J TECHNOL ASSESS, V20, P455
  75. Kocjancic E, 2007, P AM UR ASS AUA ANN
  76. Kocjancic E, 2008, P 38 ANN M INT CONT
  77. Kondo A., 2003, Neurourology and Urodynamics, V22, P485
  78. Kondo A, 2005, P INT CONT SOC ICS 3
  79. Kondo A, 2006, J OBSTET GYNAECOL RE, V32, P539, DOI 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2006.00469.x
  80. Kraus SR, 2007, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V197, DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.03.072
  81. Kunkle CM, 2015, FEMALE PELVIC MED RE, V21, P154, DOI 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000173
  82. Kuo HC, 2001, J UROLOGY, V165, P163, DOI 10.1097/00005392-200101000-00039
  83. Kwon C., 2002, Neurourology and Urodynamics, V21, P321
  84. Lapitan MCM, 2009, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD002912.pub4
  85. Lapitan MC, 2003, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD002912
  86. Lemack G, 2008, NEUROUROL URODYNAM, V27, P123
  87. Lemack GE, 2008, J UROLOGY, V180, P2076, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2008.07.027
  88. Lemack GE, 2007, NEUROUROL URODYNAM, V26, P392, DOI 10.1002/nau.20325
  89. Lemieux MC, 1991, P AM UR SOC 12 ANN M
  90. Liapis A, 2002, EUR UROL, V41, P469, DOI 10.1016/S0302-2838(02)00033-7
  91. Liapis A., 2000, Neurourology and Urodynamics, V19, P385
  92. Lim YN, 2005, AUST NZ J OBSTET GYN, V45, P52, DOI 10.1111/j.1479-828X.2005.00356.x
  93. Lucas M, 2000, SPOTLIGHT
  94. Lucas M, 2004, P INT CONT SOC 34 AN
  95. Lucas M, 2001, UK NATL RES REGISTER
  96. Lucas M, RC080 WAL OFF ES
  97. Maher CF, 2005, BJOG-INT J OBSTET GY, V112, P797, DOI 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00547.x
  98. Maher CF, 2001, INT UROGYNECOLOGY S3, V12, pS9
  99. Mallett VT, 2008, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V198, DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.09.003
  100. Markland AD, 2007, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V197, DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.08.062
  101. MCGUIRE EJ, 1993, J UROLOGY, V150, P1452
  102. Meschia M., 2001, Neurourology and Urodynamics, V20, P423
  103. Moehrer B, 2002, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI [10.1002/14651858.CD002239, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD002239]
  104. Nager C, 2007, NEUROUROL URODYNAM, V26, P709
  105. Nager CW, 2007, NEUROUROL URODYNAM, V26, P333, DOI 10.1002/nau.20348
  106. Nager CW, 2008, J UROLOGY, V179, P1470, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2007.11.077
  107. Nager CW, 2007, UROLOGY, V69, P63, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2006.08.1118
  108. Naumann G, 2006, P INT CONT SOC ICS 3
  109. The Nordic Cochrane Centre The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014, REV MAN 5 REVMAN 5
  110. OBRINK A, 1978, SCAND J UROL NEPHROL, V12, P209
  111. O'Donnell P., 1994, FEMALE UROLOGY, P175
  112. Ogah J, 2009, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD006375.pub2
  113. Osman T, 2003, BJU INT, V92, P964, DOI 10.1046/j.1464-410X.2003.04519.x
  114. O'Sullivan S, 2000, INT UROGYNAECOLOG S1, V11, pS5
  115. Pacetta AM, 2005, INT UROGYNECOLOGY S2, V16, pS58
  116. Richter H, 2008, NEUROUROL URODYNAM, V27, P682
  117. Richter HE, 2005, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V193, P2088, DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.07.068
  118. Richter HE, 2007, J PELVIC MED SURG, V13, P227
  119. Richter HE, 2008, OBSTET GYNECOL, V112, P621, DOI 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31818187c2
  120. Richter HE, 2008, J UROLOGY, V179, P1024, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2007.10.074
  121. Sand PK, 2000, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V182, P30, DOI 10.1016/S0002-9378(00)70487-X
  122. Schostak Martin, 2001, European Urology, V39, P3
  123. Schulz KF, 2010, PLOS MED, V7, DOI 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000251
  124. Sculpher MJ, 2000, NEUROUROL URODYNAM, V19, P333
  125. Seo JH, 2007, P 37 ANN M INT CONT
  126. Sharifiaghdas F, 2008, MED PRIN PRACT, V17, P209, DOI 10.1159/000117794
  127. Shin MS, 2001, P INT CONTINENCE SOC
  128. Silva-Filho AL, 2006, ARCH GYNECOL OBSTET, V273, P288, DOI 10.1007/s00404-005-0118-7
  129. Smith ARB, 2002, INCONTINENCE 2 INT C
  130. Song YF, 2004, CHUNG HUA FU CHAN KO, V39, P658
  131. Steers W, 2005, UROLOGY, V66, P1213, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2005.06.089
  132. Strohbehn K, 2007, NEW ENGL J MED, V356, P2198, DOI 10.1056/NEJMe078068
  133. Subak LL, 2008, OBSTET GYNECOL, V111, P899, DOI 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31816a1e12
  134. Tcherniakovsky M, 2009, INT UROGYNECOL J, V20, P961, DOI 10.1007/s00192-009-0880-3
  135. Teixeira M, 2008, P 38 ANN M INT CONT
  136. Tennstedt S, 2005, P INT CONT SOC ICS 3
  137. Tennstedt SL, 2008, INT UROGYNECOL J, V19, P1631, DOI 10.1007/s00192-008-0700-1
  138. Tennstedt SL, 2007, INT UROGYNECOL J, V18, P543, DOI 10.1007/s00192-006-0188-5
  139. Thomson Reuters, 2012, REF MAN PROF ED VERS
  140. Trezza G, 2001, UROGYNAECOLOGIA IN S, V15, P152
  141. Viseshsindh Wit, 2003, J Med Assoc Thai, V86, P308
  142. Wadie B, 2007, P 37 ANN M ICS 20 24
  143. Wadie BS, 2009, INT UROL NEPHROL, V41, P491, DOI 10.1007/s11255-008-9506-9
  144. Wadie BS, 2005, J UROLOGY, V174, P990, DOI 10.1097/01.ju.0000169492.96167.fe
  145. Wadie BS, 2005, P INT CONT SOC ICS 3
  146. Wagner TH, 1998, UROLOGY, V51, P355, DOI 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00623-7
  147. Walsh LP, 2006, J UROLOGY, V176, P646, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2006.03.091
  148. Wang AC, 1999, INT UROGYNECOL J, V10, pS13
  149. Ward K, 2002, BRIT MED J, V325, P67, DOI 10.1136/bmj.325.7355.67
  150. Ward K, 2001, INT UROGYNECOLOGY S3, V12, pS7
  151. Ward K. L., 2000, Neurourology and Urodynamics, V19, P388
  152. Ward K. L., 2000, Neurourology and Urodynamics, V19, P386
  153. Ware JE, 1993, SF 36 HLTH SURVEY MA
  154. Wilson PD, 1996, BRIT J OBSTET GYNAEC, V103, P154, DOI 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1996.tb09668.x
  155. Yoo ES, 2007, P 37 ANN M INT CONT
  156. Zimmern P, 2006, J UROLOGY, V175, P2174, DOI 10.1016/S0022-5347(06)00343-0
  157. Zimmern P, 2009, NEUROUROL URODYNAM, V28, P770
  158. Zimmern P, 2004, PROGRES UROLOGIE S3, V14, P26

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MCG
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/55