Prophylactic Midurethral Slings at the Time of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair.

IF 1.2 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Emir Gurbuz, Tamutenda Chidawanyika, Esra Uyanik, Savci B Telek, Oz Harmanli
{"title":"Prophylactic Midurethral Slings at the Time of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair.","authors":"Emir Gurbuz, Tamutenda Chidawanyika, Esra Uyanik, Savci B Telek, Oz Harmanli","doi":"10.1097/SPV.0000000000001942","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Prophylactic midurethral sling (MUS) placement can prevent de novo stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair, but the concern about additional MUS-related adverse events remains.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to compare postoperative outcomes between women with and without preoperative SUI after undergoing concomitant POP repair and MUS placement.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>This retrospective cohort study included women undergoing POP repair with concurrent MUS placement between 2017 and 2023. Patients in the prophylactic group did not have preoperative SUI, whereas those in the nonprophylactic group did. The primary outcome was postoperative SUI. Secondary outcomes included recurrent urinary tract infection (UTI), voiding difficulty, overactive bladder symptoms, pelvic pain, and mesh complications. Multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for potential confounders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1,132 women, there were 409 (36.1%) prophylactic and 723 (63.9%) nonprophylactic MUS procedures. Women in the prophylactic group were significantly older, predominantly postmenopausal, of lower body mass index, and more commonly had stage 3 POP and underwent sacrocolpopexy. Median follow-up was 12 months. Postoperative SUI occurred less frequently in the prophylactic group (1.7% vs 5.8%; P=0.001). Women with a prophylactic MUS were nearly 3 times less likely to have postoperative SUI (adjusted odds ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14-0.72). Postoperative recurrent UTIs were less common in the prophylactic group (1.5% vs 4.4%; P=0.008), whereas other adverse events were comparable between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Women without preoperative SUI had lower rates of postoperative SUI after concomitant POP repair and MUS placement, with similar rates of adverse events.</p>","PeriodicalId":75288,"journal":{"name":"Urogynecology (Hagerstown, Md.)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-19","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.0000000000001942","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: Prophylactic midurethral sling (MUS) placement can prevent de novo stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair, but the concern about additional MUS-related adverse events remains.

Objective: The objective of this study was to compare postoperative outcomes between women with and without preoperative SUI after undergoing concomitant POP repair and MUS placement.

Study design: This retrospective cohort study included women undergoing POP repair with concurrent MUS placement between 2017 and 2023. Patients in the prophylactic group did not have preoperative SUI, whereas those in the nonprophylactic group did. The primary outcome was postoperative SUI. Secondary outcomes included recurrent urinary tract infection (UTI), voiding difficulty, overactive bladder symptoms, pelvic pain, and mesh complications. Multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for potential confounders.

Results: Of 1,132 women, there were 409 (36.1%) prophylactic and 723 (63.9%) nonprophylactic MUS procedures. Women in the prophylactic group were significantly older, predominantly postmenopausal, of lower body mass index, and more commonly had stage 3 POP and underwent sacrocolpopexy. Median follow-up was 12 months. Postoperative SUI occurred less frequently in the prophylactic group (1.7% vs 5.8%; P=0.001). Women with a prophylactic MUS were nearly 3 times less likely to have postoperative SUI (adjusted odds ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14-0.72). Postoperative recurrent UTIs were less common in the prophylactic group (1.5% vs 4.4%; P=0.008), whereas other adverse events were comparable between groups.

Conclusions: Women without preoperative SUI had lower rates of postoperative SUI after concomitant POP repair and MUS placement, with similar rates of adverse events.

盆腔器官脱垂修复时预防性中尿道吊带术。
重要性:预防性尿道中吊带(MUS)放置可以预防盆腔器官脱垂(POP)修复后重新发生应激性尿失禁(SUI),但对额外的mus相关不良事件的担忧仍然存在。目的:本研究的目的是比较术前有和没有SUI的女性在接受POP修复和MUS放置后的术后结果。研究设计:这项回顾性队列研究包括2017年至2023年间接受POP修复并同时放置MUS的女性。预防组患者术前无SUI,而非预防组患者术前有SUI。主要结局为术后SUI。次要结局包括复发性尿路感染(UTI)、排尿困难、膀胱过度活动症状、骨盆疼痛和补片并发症。采用多元逻辑回归对潜在混杂因素进行校正。结果:在1132名女性中,有409例(36.1%)进行了预防性MUS手术,723例(63.9%)进行了非预防性MUS手术。预防组的妇女明显年龄较大,主要是绝经后,身体质量指数较低,更常见的是3期POP和骶髋固定术。中位随访时间为12个月。预防组术后SUI发生率较低(1.7% vs 5.8%; P=0.001)。预防性MUS的妇女术后SUI发生率降低近3倍(校正优势比0.31;95% CI, 0.14-0.72)。预防组术后复发性尿路感染较少(1.5% vs 4.4%; P=0.008),而组间其他不良事件具有可比性。结论:术前无SUI的女性在联合POP修复和MUS放置后,术后SUI发生率较低,不良事件发生率相似。
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
小红书