IJU case reports · 2021
Urethrovaginal fistula 11 years after a bone anchor sling using woven polyester and treatment with a Martius flap.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание 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.
Kato Kumiko, Suzuki Akitaka, Hayashi Yuji, Matsuyama Aika, Sai Hiroki, Ishiyama Akinobu, Kato Takashi, Inoue Satoshi, Hirabayashi Hiroki, Suzuki Shoji
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: We encountered a urethrovaginal fistula diagnosed 11 years after a bone anchor sling.
CASE PRESENTATION: A 58-year-old woman underwent a bone anchor sling to treat stress urinary incontinence. At age 69, mid-urethral sling was planned because of a recurrent stress urinary incontinence diagnosis, but a urethrovaginal fistula was found immediately before the procedure. After removing woven polyester, the previous sling material, simple fistula closure was carried out but failed. Usage of a vaginal speculum and powerful medical lamps during a stress test revealed leakage from both the urethrovaginal fistula and the external urethral meatus. She underwent another fistula closure using a Martius flap. Subsequently, a 1-h pad test improved from 195 to 5.1 g/h. The remaining mild stress urinary incontinence did not necessitate further treatment.
CONCLUSION: Anti-incontinence procedures using synthetic materials can cause urethrovaginal fistula. Attention must be paid to the possibility of urethrovaginal fistula when patients complain of worsened incontinence postoperatively.
CASE PRESENTATION: A 58-year-old woman underwent a bone anchor sling to treat stress urinary incontinence. At age 69, mid-urethral sling was planned because of a recurrent stress urinary incontinence diagnosis, but a urethrovaginal fistula was found immediately before the procedure. After removing woven polyester, the previous sling material, simple fistula closure was carried out but failed. Usage of a vaginal speculum and powerful medical lamps during a stress test revealed leakage from both the urethrovaginal fistula and the external urethral meatus. She underwent another fistula closure using a Martius flap. Subsequently, a 1-h pad test improved from 195 to 5.1 g/h. The remaining mild stress urinary incontinence did not necessitate further treatment.
CONCLUSION: Anti-incontinence procedures using synthetic materials can cause urethrovaginal fistula. Attention must be paid to the possibility of urethrovaginal fistula when patients complain of worsened incontinence postoperatively.