Top

International Urogynecology Journal

Published in:

01-09-2014 | Original Article

Is de novo stress incontinence after sacrocolpopexy related to anatomical changes and surgical approach?

Authors: Edgar L. LeClaire, Marium S. Mukati, Dianna Juarez, Dena White, Lieschen H. Quiroz

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 9/2014

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The objective was to investigate the relationship between new onset postoperative stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after sacrocolpopexy (SCP) and anatomical change/surgical approach.

Methods

We analyzed a retrospective cohort of patients with negative preoperative testing for SUI who underwent SCP from 2005 to 2012. Our primary outcome was new onset postoperative SUI. Logistic regression was used to examine the relationship among anatomical change, defined as ΔAa, ΔBa, ΔC, and ΔTVL, and surgical approach, categorized as abdominal (ASCP) for open cases and minimally invasive (MISCP) for laparoscopic and robot-assisted cases, and postoperative SUI.

Results

Of 795 cases, 33 ASCP (43%) and 44 MISCP (57%) met the inclusion criteria for analysis. New onset SUI was demonstrated by 15 patients (45%) of the ASCP group and 7 patients (15%) of the MISCP group (p = 0.005). New onset SUI was significantly associated with route of SCP and ΔAa (p = 0.006 and p = 0.033 respectively). Controlling for ΔAa, the odds of new onset SUI were 4.4 times higher in the ASCP group compared with the MISCP group (OR 4.37, 95% CI 1.42, 13.48). Controlling for route of SCP, the odds of new onset SUI were 2.2 times higher with moderate ΔAa compared with low ΔAa (OR 2.16 95% CI 1.07, 4.38). The odds of new onset SUI was 4.7 times higher in those with high ΔAa than in those with low ΔAa (OR 4.67 95% CI 1.14, 19.22). ΔBa, ΔC, and ΔTVL were not associated with new onset SUI.

Conclusions

Greater reduction in point Aa and abdominal surgical route are risk factors for new onset postoperative SUI after SCP.

Brubaker LBR, Jacquetin B, Schuessler B, Weidner A, Zimmern P et al (2002) Incontinence: 2nd International Consultation on Incontinence, 2nd edn. Health Publications, Plymouth

Boyles SHWA, Meyn L (2003) Procedures for pelvic organ prolapse in the United States, 1979–1997. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188:108–115PubMedCrossRef

Nygaard I, Brubaker L, Zyczynski HM, Cundiff G, Richter H, Gantz M, Fine P, Menefee S, Ridgeway B, Visco A, Warren LK, Zhang M, Meikle S (2013) Long-term outcomes following abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. JAMA 309(19):2016–2024PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Schmid C (2013) Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:CD004014PubMed

Bump RC, Norton PA (1998) Epidemiology and natural history of pelvic floor dysfunction. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 25(4):723–746PubMedCrossRef

Abrams P, Andersson KE, Birder L, Brubaker L, Cardozo L, Chapple C, Cottenden A, Davila W, de Ridder D, Dmochowski R, Drake M, Dubeau C, Fry C, Hanno P, Smith JH, Herschorn S, Hosker G, Kelleher C, Koelbl H, Khoury S, Madoff R, Milsom I, Moore K, Newman D, Nitti V, Norton C, Nygaard I, Payne C, Smith A, Staskin D, Tekgul S, Thuroff J, Tubaro A, Vodusek D, Wein A, Wyndaele JJ (2010) Fourth International Consultation on Incontinence Recommendations of the International Scientific Committee: evaluation and treatment of urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, and fecal incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn 29(1):213–240PubMedCrossRef

Bergman A, Koonings PP, Ballard CA (1988) Predicting postoperative urinary incontinence development in women undergoing operation for genitourinary prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 158(5):1171–1175PubMedCrossRef

Richardson DA, Bent AE, Ostergard DR (1983) The effect of uterovaginal prolapse on urethrovesical pressure dynamics. Am J Obstet Gynecol 146(8):901–905PubMed

Rosenzweig BA, Pushkin S, Blumenfeld D, Bhatia NN (1992) Prevalence of abnormal urodynamic test results in continent women with severe genitourinary prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 79(4):539–542PubMed

10.

Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, Connolly A, Cundiff G, Weber AM, Zyczynski H (2004) Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol 104(4):805–823. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000139514.90897.07 PubMedCrossRef

11.

Brubaker L, Cundiff GW, Fine P, Nygaard I, Richter HE, Visco AG, Zyczynski H, Brown MB, Weber AM (2006) Abdominal sacrocolpopexy with Burch colposuspension to reduce urinary stress incontinence. N Engl J Med 354(15):1557–1566PubMedCrossRef

12.

Sarlos D, Brandner S, Kots L, Gygax N, Schaer G (2008) Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for uterine and post-hysterectomy prolapse: anatomical results, quality of life and perioperative outcome-a prospective study with 101 cases. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19(10):1415–1422. doi:10.1007/s00192-008-0657-0 PubMedCrossRef

13.

Frick AC, Paraiso MF (2009) Laparoscopic management of incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. Clin Obstet Gynecol 52(3):390–400PubMedCrossRef

14.

Elliott DS, Frank I, Dimarco DS, Chow GK (2004) Gynecologic use of robotically assisted laparoscopy: Sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of high-grade vaginal vault prolapse. Am J Surg 188(4A Suppl):52S–56SPubMedCrossRef

15.

Addison WA, Timmons MC (1993) Abdominal approach to vaginal eversion. Clin Obstet Gynecol 36(4):995–1004PubMedCrossRef

16.

Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, Shull BL, Smith AR (1996) The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175(1):10–17PubMedCrossRef

17.

Siddiqui NY, Geller EJ, Visco AG (2012) Symptomatic and anatomic 1-year outcomes after robotic and abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 206(5):1CrossRef

18.

Freeman RM, Pantazis K, Thomson A, Frappell J, Bombieri L, Moran P, Slack M, Scott P, Waterfield M (2012) A randomised controlled trial of abdominal versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: LAS study. Int Urogynecol J 3:3

19.

Higgs PJ, Chua HL, Smith AR (2005) Long term review of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. BJOG 112(8):1134–1138PubMedCrossRef

20.

Leruth J, Fillet M, Waltregny D (2012) Incidence and risk factors of postoperative stress urinary incontinence following laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in patients with negative preoperative prolapse reduction stress testing. Int Urogynecol J 24:24

21.

Elser DM, Moen MD, Stanford EJ, Keil K, Matthews CA, Kohli N, Mattox F, Tomezsko J (2010) Abdominal sacrocolpopexy and urinary incontinence: surgical planning based on urodynamics. Am J Obstet Gynecol 202(4):371–375.e1–5CrossRef

22.

Visco AG, Brubaker L, Nygaard I, Richter HE, Cundiff G, Fine P, Zyczynski H, Brown MB, Weber AM (2008) The role of preoperative urodynamic testing in stress-continent women undergoing sacrocolpopexy: the Colpopexy and Urinary Reduction Efforts (CARE) randomized surgical trial. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19(5):607–614PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Title: Is de novo stress incontinence after sacrocolpopexy related to anatomical changes and surgical approach?
Authors: Edgar L. LeClaire
Marium S. Mukati
Dianna Juarez
Dena White
Lieschen H. Quiroz
Publication date: 01-09-2014
Publisher: Springer London
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 9/2014
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2366-1

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Springer Medicine

Is de novo stress incontinence after sacrocolpopexy related to anatomical changes and surgical approach?

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Methods

Results

Conclusions

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 9/2014

Dyspareunia and pelvic floor muscle function before and during pregnancy and after childbirth

Repair of complete urethral disruption due to synthetic sling complication

Prulifloxacin vs fosfomycin for prophylaxis in female patients with recurrent UTIs: a non-inferiority trial

Analysis of the learning process for laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: identification of challenging steps

Collagen type III alpha 1 polymorphism (rs1800255, COL3A1 2209 G>A) assessed with high-resolution melting analysis is not associated with pelvic organ prolapse in the Dutch population

Perioperative complications of robotic sacrocolpopexy for post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse