TVT and TVT-O for surgical treatment of primary stress urinary incontinence: prospective randomized trial
Jazyk angličtina Země Anglie, Velká Británie Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu srovnávací studie, časopisecké články, randomizované kontrolované studie, práce podpořená grantem
- MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- prospektivní studie MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- stresová inkontinence moči chirurgie MeSH
- suburetrální pásky * škodlivé účinky MeSH
- výsledek terapie MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
- randomizované kontrolované studie MeSH
- srovnávací studie MeSH
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: A study was conducted to compare the efficacy and complications of TVT and TVT-O. METHODS: This study is a prospective randomized trial involving 300 women with primary SUI; 149 received TVT, and 151 patients were treated with TVT-O. At the 1 year follow-up, 141 TVT patients and 147 TVT-O patients (dropout, 5.3% and 2.6%) were evaluated using urodynamic studies, validated questionnaires, and a 1-h pad test. RESULTS: The mean operating time was shorter in the TVT-O group (p < 0.001). Urinary retention was not significantly different (p > 0.05). Inner thigh discomfort was reported by 5.4% of TVT-O patients. In the TVT and the TVT-O groups, respectively, 90.1% and 88.4% women were objectively cured. The satisfaction with the surgical outcome reflects the significant decrease in the questionnaire mean symptom scores in both groups. Postoperative de novo urgency was significantly more common in the TVT-O patients (p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: The groups showed comparable objective and subjective cure rates.
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002 Jan;81(1):72-7 PubMed
Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2001;12 Suppl 2:S15-18 PubMed
Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Mar;111(3):611-21 PubMed
Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Nov;98(5 Pt 1):732-6 PubMed
Eur Urol. 2003 Apr;43(4):391-404 PubMed
Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008 Aug;19(8):1043-7 PubMed
Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2004 Jul-Aug;15(4):223-6 PubMed
Neurourol Urodyn. 2004;23(4):322-30 PubMed
J Urol. 2007 Jan;177(1):214-8 PubMed
Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008 Apr;19(4):481-7 PubMed
J Urol. 2005 Apr;173(4):1223-8 PubMed
Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008 May;19(5):711-5 PubMed
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Jul;191(1):165-70 PubMed
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2009 Feb;49(1):99-105 PubMed
Neurourol Urodyn. 2007;26(1):37-41 PubMed
BJOG. 2007 May;114(5):522-31 PubMed
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Jul;175(1):10-7 PubMed
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2007 Sep;134(1):87-94 PubMed
Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 1996;7(2):81-5; discussion 85-6 PubMed
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Mar;190(3):602-8 PubMed
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Jul;197(1):3-11 PubMed
Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Nov;100(5 Pt 1):898-902 PubMed
Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007 Nov;18(11):1257-61 PubMed
Urology. 2004 Aug;64(2):376-7 PubMed
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Suppl. 1990;153:7-31 PubMed
Eur Urol. 2004 Feb;45(2):203-7 PubMed
BJU Int. 2004 Jul;94(1):110-3 PubMed
Eur Urol. 2003 Dec;44(6):724-30 PubMed
Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2006;62(3):160-4 PubMed
Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Dec;104(6):1259-62 PubMed
