Pelvicol™ Pubovaginal Sling versus Tension-Free Vaginal Tape for Treatment of Urodynamic Stress Incontinence:: A Prospective Randomized Three-Year Follow-Up Study

Mohamed Abdel-Fattah, J W Barrington, A S Arunkalaivanan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

53 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term success rates, complication rates and patient satisfaction rates for Pelvicol™ pubovaginal sling (Bard) versus TVT™ (Gynecare) in surgical treatment of urodynamic stress incontinence (USI) in women.
Design: Prospective randomized cohort trial
Setting: District General Hospital, South West of England.
Methods: One hundred and forty-two women with urodynamic stress incontinence were randomized to either surgical procedure (Pelvicol™ = 74, TVT™ = 68) with median follow-up of 36 month. A postal questionnaire was sent to all women and the response rate was excellent at approximately 90% in both groups.
Results: Cure of incontinence, as identified by a quality of life improvement >90%, and/or patient-determined continent status as dry, were comparable in both groups. When the cure rates were adjusted assuming the non-respondents as failures the figures were almost identical (p > 0.05). Preoperative continence pad usage was similar for both groups. Overall, a postoperative significant decrease in pad score was noted in both groups (p = 0.01) but there was no significant difference between the groups (p > 0.05). Statistical analysis failed to detect significant differences between both groups as regards complication rates such as frequency, nocturia, de-novo urgency or dyspareunia.
Conclusion: Pelvicol™ sling is a safe procedure in the surgical management of USI with similar success rate and patient satisfaction rate to TVT™ up to three years of follow-up.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)629-635
JournalEuropean Urology
Volume46
Issue number5
Early online date1 Aug 2004
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2004

Fingerprint

Suburethral Slings
Urodynamics
Patient Satisfaction
Nocturia
Dyspareunia
District Hospitals
Quality Improvement
General Hospitals
England
Therapeutics
Quality of Life

Keywords

  • Pelvicol™
  • TVT
  • Stress urinary incontinence

Cite this

Pelvicol™ Pubovaginal Sling versus Tension-Free Vaginal Tape for Treatment of Urodynamic Stress Incontinence:: A Prospective Randomized Three-Year Follow-Up Study. / Abdel-Fattah, Mohamed; Barrington, J W; Arunkalaivanan, A S.

In: European Urology, Vol. 46, No. 5, 11.2004, p. 629-635.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{91804318d97c4b62ac9b31d432aa1e26,
title = "Pelvicol™ Pubovaginal Sling versus Tension-Free Vaginal Tape for Treatment of Urodynamic Stress Incontinence:: A Prospective Randomized Three-Year Follow-Up Study",
abstract = "Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term success rates, complication rates and patient satisfaction rates for Pelvicol™ pubovaginal sling (Bard) versus TVT™ (Gynecare) in surgical treatment of urodynamic stress incontinence (USI) in women. Design: Prospective randomized cohort trial Setting: District General Hospital, South West of England. Methods: One hundred and forty-two women with urodynamic stress incontinence were randomized to either surgical procedure (Pelvicol™ = 74, TVT™ = 68) with median follow-up of 36 month. A postal questionnaire was sent to all women and the response rate was excellent at approximately 90{\%} in both groups. Results: Cure of incontinence, as identified by a quality of life improvement >90{\%}, and/or patient-determined continent status as dry, were comparable in both groups. When the cure rates were adjusted assuming the non-respondents as failures the figures were almost identical (p > 0.05). Preoperative continence pad usage was similar for both groups. Overall, a postoperative significant decrease in pad score was noted in both groups (p = 0.01) but there was no significant difference between the groups (p > 0.05). Statistical analysis failed to detect significant differences between both groups as regards complication rates such as frequency, nocturia, de-novo urgency or dyspareunia. Conclusion: Pelvicol™ sling is a safe procedure in the surgical management of USI with similar success rate and patient satisfaction rate to TVT™ up to three years of follow-up.",
keywords = "Pelvicol™ , TVT, Stress urinary incontinence",
author = "Mohamed Abdel-Fattah and Barrington, {J W} and Arunkalaivanan, {A S}",
year = "2004",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1016/j.eururo.2004.07.013",
language = "English",
volume = "46",
pages = "629--635",
journal = "European Urology",
issn = "0302-2838",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pelvicol™ Pubovaginal Sling versus Tension-Free Vaginal Tape for Treatment of Urodynamic Stress Incontinence:: A Prospective Randomized Three-Year Follow-Up Study

AU - Abdel-Fattah, Mohamed

AU - Barrington, J W

AU - Arunkalaivanan, A S

PY - 2004/11

Y1 - 2004/11

N2 - Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term success rates, complication rates and patient satisfaction rates for Pelvicol™ pubovaginal sling (Bard) versus TVT™ (Gynecare) in surgical treatment of urodynamic stress incontinence (USI) in women. Design: Prospective randomized cohort trial Setting: District General Hospital, South West of England. Methods: One hundred and forty-two women with urodynamic stress incontinence were randomized to either surgical procedure (Pelvicol™ = 74, TVT™ = 68) with median follow-up of 36 month. A postal questionnaire was sent to all women and the response rate was excellent at approximately 90% in both groups. Results: Cure of incontinence, as identified by a quality of life improvement >90%, and/or patient-determined continent status as dry, were comparable in both groups. When the cure rates were adjusted assuming the non-respondents as failures the figures were almost identical (p > 0.05). Preoperative continence pad usage was similar for both groups. Overall, a postoperative significant decrease in pad score was noted in both groups (p = 0.01) but there was no significant difference between the groups (p > 0.05). Statistical analysis failed to detect significant differences between both groups as regards complication rates such as frequency, nocturia, de-novo urgency or dyspareunia. Conclusion: Pelvicol™ sling is a safe procedure in the surgical management of USI with similar success rate and patient satisfaction rate to TVT™ up to three years of follow-up.

AB - Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term success rates, complication rates and patient satisfaction rates for Pelvicol™ pubovaginal sling (Bard) versus TVT™ (Gynecare) in surgical treatment of urodynamic stress incontinence (USI) in women. Design: Prospective randomized cohort trial Setting: District General Hospital, South West of England. Methods: One hundred and forty-two women with urodynamic stress incontinence were randomized to either surgical procedure (Pelvicol™ = 74, TVT™ = 68) with median follow-up of 36 month. A postal questionnaire was sent to all women and the response rate was excellent at approximately 90% in both groups. Results: Cure of incontinence, as identified by a quality of life improvement >90%, and/or patient-determined continent status as dry, were comparable in both groups. When the cure rates were adjusted assuming the non-respondents as failures the figures were almost identical (p > 0.05). Preoperative continence pad usage was similar for both groups. Overall, a postoperative significant decrease in pad score was noted in both groups (p = 0.01) but there was no significant difference between the groups (p > 0.05). Statistical analysis failed to detect significant differences between both groups as regards complication rates such as frequency, nocturia, de-novo urgency or dyspareunia. Conclusion: Pelvicol™ sling is a safe procedure in the surgical management of USI with similar success rate and patient satisfaction rate to TVT™ up to three years of follow-up.

KW - Pelvicol™

KW - TVT

KW - Stress urinary incontinence

U2 - 10.1016/j.eururo.2004.07.013

DO - 10.1016/j.eururo.2004.07.013

M3 - Article

VL - 46

SP - 629

EP - 635

JO - European Urology

JF - European Urology

SN - 0302-2838

IS - 5

ER -