Search

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: We compared pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair with and without midurethral sling (MUS) in women with occult stress urinary incontinence (SUI). METHODS: This was a randomized trial conducted by a consortium of 13 teaching hospitals assessing a parallel cohort of continent women with symptomatic stage II or greater POP. Women with occult SUI were randomly assigned to vaginal prolapse repair with or without MUS. Women without occult SUI received POP surgery. Main outcomes were the absence of SUI at the 12-month follow-up based on the Urogenital Distress Inventory and the need for additional treatment for SUI. RESULTS: We evaluated 231 women, of whom 91 randomized as follows: 43 to POP surgery with and 47 without MUS. A greater number of women in the MUS group reported absence of SUI [86 % vs. 48 %; relative risk (RR) 1.79; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.29-2.48]. No women in the MUS group received additional treatment for postoperative SUI; six (13 %) in the control group had a secondary MUS. Women with occult SUI reported more urinary symptoms after POP surgery and more often underwent treatment for postoperative SUI than women without occult SUI. CONCLUSIONS: Women with occult SUI had a higher risk of reporting SUI after POP surgery compared with women without occult SUI. Adding a MUS to POP surgery reduced the risk of postoperative SUI and the need for its treatment in women with occult SUI. Of women with occult SUI undergoing POP-only surgery, 13 % needed additional MUS. We found no differences in global impression of improvement and quality of life.

OBJECTIVE: To compare transvaginal prolapse repair combined with midurethral sling (MUS) versus prolapse repair only. DESIGN: Multi-centre randomised trial. SETTING: Fourteen teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. POPULATION: Women with symptomatic stage two or greater pelvic organ prolapse (POP), and subjective or objective stress urinary incontinence (SUI) without prolapse reduction. METHODS: Women were randomly assigned to undergo vaginal prolapse repair with or without MUS. Analysis was according to intention to treat. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome at 12 months' follow-up was the absence of urinary incontinence (UI) assessed with the Urogenital Distress Inventory and treatment for SUI or overactive bladder. Secondary outcomes included complications. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-four women were analysed at 12 months' follow-up (63 in MUS and 71 in control group). More women in the MUS group reported the absence of UI and SUI; respectively 62% versus 30% UI (relative risk [RR] 2.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.39-3.15) and 78% versus 39% SUI (RR 1.97; 95% CI 1.44-2.71). Fewer women underwent treatment for postoperative SUI in the MUS group (10% versus 37%; RR 0.26; 95% CI 0.11-0.59). In the control group, 12 women (17%) underwent MUS after prolapse surgery versus none in the MUS group. Severe complications were more common in the MUS group, but the difference was not statistically significant (16% versus 6%; RR 2.82; 95% CI 0.93-8.54). CONCLUSIONS: Women with prolapse and co-existing SUI are less likely to have SUI after transvaginal prolapse repair with MUS compared with prolapse repair only. However, only 17% of the women undergoing POP surgery needed additional MUS. A well-informed decision balancing risks and benefits of both strategies should be tailored to individual women.