MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1056/nejmoa070416

Медицинская библиотека · The New England journal of medicine · 2007

Burch colposuspension versus fascial sling to reduce urinary stress incontinence.

Albo Michael E, Richter Holly E, Brubaker Linda, Norton Peggy, Kraus Stephen R, Zimmern Philippe E, Chai Toby C, Zyczynski Halina, Diokno Ananias C, Tennstedt Sharon, Nager Charles, Lloyd L Keith, FitzGerald MaryPat, Lemack Gary E, Johnson Harry W, Leng Wendy, Mallett Veronica, Stoddard Anne M, Menefee Shawn, Varner R Edward, Kenton Kimberly, Moalli Pam, Sirls Larry, Dandreo Kimberly J, Kusek John W, Nyberg Leroy M, Steers William, Urinary Incontinence Treatment Network

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Many surgical procedures are available for women with urinary stress incontinence, yet few randomized clinical trials have been conducted to provide a basis for treatment recommendations.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter, randomized clinical trial comparing two procedures--the pubovaginal sling, using autologous rectus fascia, and the Burch colposuspension--among women with stress incontinence. Women were eligible for the study if they had predominant symptoms associated with the condition, a positive stress test, and urethral hypermobility. The primary outcomes were success in terms of overall urinary-incontinence measures, which required a negative pad test, no urinary incontinence (as recorded in a 3-day diary), a negative cough and Valsalva stress test, no self-reported symptoms, and no retreatment for the condition, and success in terms of measures of stress incontinence specifically, which required only the latter three criteria. We also assessed postoperative urge incontinence, voiding dysfunction, and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 655 women were randomly assigned to study groups: 326 to undergo the sling procedure and 329 to undergo the Burch procedure; 520 women (79%) completed the outcome assessment. At 24 months, success rates were higher for women who underwent the sling procedure than for those who underwent the Burch procedure, for both the overall category of success (47% vs. 38%, P=0.01) and the category specific to stress incontinence (66% vs. 49%, P<0.001). However, more women who underwent the sling procedure had urinary tract infections, difficulty voiding, and postoperative urge incontinence.

CONCLUSIONS

The autologous fascial sling results in a higher rate of successful treatment of stress incontinence but also greater morbidity than the Burch colposuspension. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00064662 [ClinicalTrials.gov] .).

Для цитирования: Albo Michael E, Richter Holly E, Brubaker Linda, Norton Peggy, Kraus Stephen R, Zimmern Philippe E, Chai Toby C, Zyczynski Halina, Diokno Ananias C, Tennstedt Sharon, Nager Charles, Lloyd L Keith, FitzGerald MaryPat, Lemack Gary E, Johnson Harry W, Leng Wendy, Mallett Veronica, Stoddard Anne M, Menefee Shawn, Varner R Edward, Kenton Kimberly, Moalli Pam, Sirls Larry, Dandreo Kimberly J, Kusek John W, Nyberg Leroy M, Steers William, Urinary Incontinence Treatment Network. Burch colposuspension versus fascial sling to reduce urinary stress incontinence.. The New England journal of medicine. 2007. DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa070416.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.