Neurourology and urodynamics · 2021
Transvaginal radiofrequency energy for the treatment of urinary stress incontinence: A comparison of monopolar and bipolar technologies in both pre- and post-menopausal patients.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Abdelaziz Ahmed, Dell Jeffrey, Karram Mickey
Аннотация
AIM: A study to compare the effect of two different radio frequency energy models (mono polar and bipolar) for the treatment of urinary stress incontinence.
METHODS: Retrospective chart review, which was conducted at 2 sites, 69 patients received treatment with a bipolar radiofrequency device. Out of those 69 patients, 13 patients received bipolar in conjugation with CO2 laser treatment, while 32 patients received monopolar frequency. The study protocol normally consists of three sessions of treatment. Each session was four weeks apart with a whole 6-month duration follow-up. Results were evaluated by urogenital distress inventory (UDI)-6 questionnaire before and after treatment.
RESULTS: The bipolar group improved UDI-6 scores across time more so than did the monopolar group with some evidence suggesting that the bipolar radiofrequency treatment was more effective compared to the monopolar radiofrequency. Three months after treatment, the bipolar group UDI-6 values were lower than those of the monopolar group. Six months after treatment, the UDI-6 scores increased in both groups, suggesting decrease efficacy with time however, the bipolar group's UDI-6 scores were consistently lower than the monopolar group's scores.
CONCLUSION: This study shows benefit of both monopolar and bipolar radiofrequency device in patients with stress urinary incontinence and mixed UI, with bipolar RF more efficacious than monopolar RF. More randomized prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.
METHODS: Retrospective chart review, which was conducted at 2 sites, 69 patients received treatment with a bipolar radiofrequency device. Out of those 69 patients, 13 patients received bipolar in conjugation with CO2 laser treatment, while 32 patients received monopolar frequency. The study protocol normally consists of three sessions of treatment. Each session was four weeks apart with a whole 6-month duration follow-up. Results were evaluated by urogenital distress inventory (UDI)-6 questionnaire before and after treatment.
RESULTS: The bipolar group improved UDI-6 scores across time more so than did the monopolar group with some evidence suggesting that the bipolar radiofrequency treatment was more effective compared to the monopolar radiofrequency. Three months after treatment, the bipolar group UDI-6 values were lower than those of the monopolar group. Six months after treatment, the UDI-6 scores increased in both groups, suggesting decrease efficacy with time however, the bipolar group's UDI-6 scores were consistently lower than the monopolar group's scores.
CONCLUSION: This study shows benefit of both monopolar and bipolar radiofrequency device in patients with stress urinary incontinence and mixed UI, with bipolar RF more efficacious than monopolar RF. More randomized prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.