Volume 201, Issue 5 , Pages 516.e1-516.e7, November 2009
Long-term efficacy of the pubovaginal Mersilene mesh sling
Objective
The objective of the study was to determine the efficacy of the pubovaginal Mersilene mesh sling (PVMMS) for complicated urodynamic stress incontinence (USI).
Study Design
Between 1990 and 2008, patients with USI plus an at-risk diagnosis underwent a PVMMS by a single surgeon. They were followed up with urodynamics (UDE) and Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-short form 20 (PFDI-20). Stratification was in an at-risk hierarchy: intrinsic sphincter deficiency (ISD) greater than recurrent USI (RUSI) greater than USI with chronically increased intraabdominal pressure (CI-IAP). A cough stress test determined objective cure. PFDI question 17 assessed subjective cure.
Results
Three hundred six patients with ISD (43.5%), RUSI (26.8%), and CI-IAP (29.7%) had objective cure rates of 89.2% in the short term, 86.7% in the intermediate term, and 91.2% in the long term. A group of 48 patients with both short- and long-term UDEs showed cures of 100% and 91.7%. Long-term objective cure rates were: ISD, 90.5% (n = 21); RUSI, 84.2%, (n = 19); CI-IAP, 100% (n = 17). The mean score of postoperative PFDI question 17 was 0.57 (n = 119). Mean symptom improvement was –2.98 (n = 52; P < .0001).
Conclusion
We demonstrated PVMMS to be subjectively and objectively effective in long-term treatment of complicated forms of USI.
Key words: intrinsic sphincter deficiency, Mersilene mesh, pubovaginal sling, recurrent urodynamic stress incontinence, surgery for stress incontinence, urodynamic stress incontinence
To access this article, please choose from the options below
Cite this article as: Young SB, Howard AE, Illanes DS, et al. Long-term efficacy of the pubovaginal Mersilene mesh sling. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;201:516.e1-7.
This study was supported in part by the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, UMass Memorial Medical Center, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA.
The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Armed Forces.
PII: S0002-9378(09)00769-8
doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2009.07.003
© 2009 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Volume 201, Issue 5 , Pages 516.e1-516.e7, November 2009
