Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 25, 2025
Vessel-sparing Excision and Primary Anastomosis
Published on: January 7, 2019
Randomized Trial of Single-Incision Midurethral Sling and Laparoscopic Burch Colposuspension: Postoperative Surgical
Tugba Sahin Yilmaz1, Yakup Kumtepe1, Gamze Nur Cimilli Senocak1
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ataturk University, Erzurum, Turkey (all authors).
Study Objective:
Various retropubic and midurethral sling techniques have shown high cure rates in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI). This study aimed to compare single-incision midurethral sling (SIMS) and laparoscopic Burch colposuspension (LBC) procedures in patients with SUI in terms of the effectiveness, patient satisfaction, surgical complications and results.
Design:
This is a prospective randomized study.
Setting:
A university tertiary hospital.
Patients:
Forty patients with clinically and/or urodynamically proven SUI who agreed to surgical treatment were randomized to the SIMS and LBC groups and included in the study.
Interventions:
Patients were treated with SIMS and LBC operations.
Measurements And Main Results:
Demographic characteristics of patients, physical and pelvic examination, preoperative and postoperative clinical findings, Kings Health Questionnaire form, Female Sexual Function Index and Prolapse Quality of Life Questionnaire form, postoperative day 1 visual analog scale score, and postoperative complications were recorded. Objective and subjective success rates were recorded by re-evaluating the patients in the first and sixth months of the operation. Objective success was defined as having a negative stress test and subjective success was defined as the absence of stress-induced urine leakage after surgery in a validated questionnaire. The primary result of our study was considered to be objective success, whereas the secondary result was subjective success and life quality tests. Twenty patients each in the SIMS group and the LBC group were included in the study. No significant difference was found in objective success (90% vs 85%, p = .633) or subjective success (85% vs 75%, p = .695) between the 2 groups at 6-month follow-up. A significant improvement in life quality was observed in the postoperative period for both groups; however, the difference between the groups was not significant. There was an improvement in sexual function in both groups. Nonetheless, although this improvement was significant in the SIMS group, it was not significant in the LBC group. In addition, surgery time, catheterization time, and hospitalization time were shorter in the SIMS group than in the LBC group. The visual analog scale score on postoperative day 1 was lower in the SIMS group. Groups were not different in terms of preoperative and postoperative complications.
Conclusion:
This preliminary study is the first randomized study that compares the LBC and SIMS procedures in the literature. It shows that SIMS and LBC procedures have not different objective and subjective success rates in the short term. It was also observed that they increase both sexual and life quality results in a positive and similar way.
