Adjustable mini‐sling compared with conventional mid‐urethral slings in women with urinary incontinence. A randomized controlled trial. (15th September 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Rudnicki, Martin; von Bothmer‐Ostling, Katarina; Holstad, Anja; Magnusson, Claes; Majida, Memona; Merkel, Constanze; Prien, Jens; Jakobsson, Ulf; Teleman, Pia
• Is Part Of: Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica. Volume 96:Number 11(2017)
• Page Start: 1347
• Page End: 1356
• Publication Date: 2017-09-15
• Subjects: Mini‐sling -- mid‐urethral sling -- single‐incision mini‐sling -- standard mid‐urethral slings -- stress urinary incontinence; Gynecology -- Periodicals; Pregnancy -- Periodicals; Obstetrics -- Periodicals; 618.05
• DOI: 10.1111/aogs.13205
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0001-6349

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: The primary aim of this study was to compare the objective and subjective outcomes and short‐term complication rates of an adjustable single‐incision mini‐sling (SIMS) vs. standard mid‐urethral slings (SMUS). The secondary aim was to report pain perception and complications at the one‐year follow up. Material and methods: The study was designed as a multicenter prospective randomized trial where women were included from eight centers in Denmark, Norway and Sweden. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01754558. A total of 305 women less than 60 years old with verified stress urinary incontinence were included. All women were randomized to SIMS (Ajust ® ; n = 155) or SMUS (TVT, TVT‐O or TOT; n = 150) and were evaluated by stress test and bladder diary before and after surgery and symptoms related to incontinence using ICIQ‐SF, PISQ‐12 and PGI‐S and PGI‐I. Objective cure was defined as no leakage during a stress test and subjective cure defined as no leakage stated in the bladder diary or no indication of urinary leakage in the ICIQ‐SF. Furthermore, mesh exposure and dyspareunia were recorded. Results: In total, 280 women [141 (91%) in the SIMS and 139 (94%) in the SMUS groups] participated in the one‐year follow up. No difference between the groups was observed regarding objective and subjective outcomes. VAS score disclosed a lower postoperative pain perception in the SIMS group than in the SMUS group. Conclusions: Ajust ® appears to be as efficient as SMUS regarding objective and subjective outcomes and was associated with less pain perception during the postoperative period.