Update on Single-incision Slings.

IF 1.2 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Omar Mesina, Emily S Lukacz
{"title":"Update on Single-incision Slings.","authors":"Omar Mesina, Emily S Lukacz","doi":"10.1097/SPV.0000000000001734","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Single-incision slings (SIS) offer a minimally invasive option for treating stress urinary incontinence (SUI), aiming to reduce operative time, postoperative pain, and recovery compared to traditional slings. Their growing use underscores the importance of understanding their effectiveness, safety profile, and long-term outcomes to ensure optimal patient care.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective was to update current evidence on the safety, efficacy, and economic impact of SISs for the treatment of SUI in women.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A structured literature review was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 522 Postmarket Surveillance Studies Database up to December 2024. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials, prospective observational studies, meta-analyses and the FDA summary addressing SIS outcomes. Key metrics included objective and subjective cure rates, complications, and economic evaluations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 28 publications were reviewed since the most recent Cochrane review in 2023. Overall, high subjective (73.3% to 94.2%) and objective cure rates (61.5% to 94%) continue to be reported for SISs with operative times of 10.7 to 20.4 min and low adverse events of mesh complications (0% to 14.2%), reintervention procedures (0% to 16.3%) and de novo urgency urinary incontinence (0% to 15%) up to 36 months. Economic analyses revealed short-term cost savings for SISs, particularly in outpatient settings under local anesthesia, though cost-effectiveness over longer periods remains uncertain due to potential retreatment and/or complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Single-incision slings offer a minimally invasive option for SUI with comparable efficacy to full-length midurethral slings, with rare perioperative complications and short operative times. Long-term outcomes on complications and durability are needed. Future studies are needed to guide clinical decision making, particularly regarding longer-term complications and cost-effectiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":75288,"journal":{"name":"Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000001734","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Single-incision slings (SIS) offer a minimally invasive option for treating stress urinary incontinence (SUI), aiming to reduce operative time, postoperative pain, and recovery compared to traditional slings. Their growing use underscores the importance of understanding their effectiveness, safety profile, and long-term outcomes to ensure optimal patient care.

Objective: The objective was to update current evidence on the safety, efficacy, and economic impact of SISs for the treatment of SUI in women.

Study design: A structured literature review was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 522 Postmarket Surveillance Studies Database up to December 2024. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials, prospective observational studies, meta-analyses and the FDA summary addressing SIS outcomes. Key metrics included objective and subjective cure rates, complications, and economic evaluations.

Results: A total of 28 publications were reviewed since the most recent Cochrane review in 2023. Overall, high subjective (73.3% to 94.2%) and objective cure rates (61.5% to 94%) continue to be reported for SISs with operative times of 10.7 to 20.4 min and low adverse events of mesh complications (0% to 14.2%), reintervention procedures (0% to 16.3%) and de novo urgency urinary incontinence (0% to 15%) up to 36 months. Economic analyses revealed short-term cost savings for SISs, particularly in outpatient settings under local anesthesia, though cost-effectiveness over longer periods remains uncertain due to potential retreatment and/or complications.

Conclusions: Single-incision slings offer a minimally invasive option for SUI with comparable efficacy to full-length midurethral slings, with rare perioperative complications and short operative times. Long-term outcomes on complications and durability are needed. Future studies are needed to guide clinical decision making, particularly regarding longer-term complications and cost-effectiveness.

单切口吊索的最新进展。
重要性:单切口吊带(SIS)为治疗压力性尿失禁(SUI)提供了一种微创选择,与传统吊带相比,旨在减少手术时间、术后疼痛和恢复。它们越来越多的使用强调了了解其有效性、安全性和长期结果的重要性,以确保最佳的患者护理。目的:目的是更新目前关于SISs治疗女性SUI的安全性、有效性和经济影响的证据。研究设计:使用PubMed、Cochrane图书馆和美国食品和药物管理局(FDA) 522上市后监测研究数据库进行结构化文献综述,截至2024年12月。纳入标准为随机对照试验、前瞻性观察性研究、荟萃分析和FDA关于SIS结果的总结。关键指标包括客观和主观治愈率、并发症和经济评价。结果:自2023年最近一次Cochrane综述以来,共综述了28篇文献。总体而言,SISs的主观治除率(73.3%至94.2%)和客观治除率(61.5%至94%)持续较高,手术时间为10.7至20.4分钟,补片并发症(0%至14.2%)、再干预手术(0%至16.3%)和新生急迫性尿失禁(0%至15%)的不良事件发生率低,持续36个月。经济分析显示,局部麻醉下的SISs短期成本节省,特别是在门诊环境中,尽管由于潜在的再治疗和/或并发症,长期的成本效益仍不确定。结论:单切口吊带是治疗SUI的一种微创选择,其疗效与全长中尿道吊带相当,且围手术期并发症少,手术时间短。需要并发症和持久性的长期结果。未来的研究需要指导临床决策,特别是关于长期并发症和成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信