[Study on reductive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse concomitant with anti-incontinence sling for treatment of occult stress urinary incontinence].

Objective: To evaluate the clinical outcome of anti-incontinence sling in the treatment of occult stress urinary incontinence (OSUI) during reductive surgery for advanced pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

Methods: From Jun. 2003 to Dec. 2012, 78 patients with OSUI underwent reductive surgery for advanced POP such as high uterosacral ligament suspension, sacrospinous ligament suspension and sacral colpopexy in the First Affiliated Hospital, General Hospital of People's Liberation Army. Among them, 41 patients received reductive surgery alone was enrolled in non-concomitant anti-incontinence group and the other 37 patients who underwent same surgery with tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) or tension-free vaginal tape-obturator technique (TVT-O) was in anti-incontinence group. The patient's demography, objective and subjective outcomes, as well as complications and injures were compared between the two groups. The pelvic organ prolapse quantitation (POP-Q) was used to evaluate the objective outcomes of POP. Urinary distress inventory (UDI-6) and incontinence impact questionnaire short form (IIQ-7) were used to evaluate the subjective outcomes of stress urinary incontinence (SUI).

Results: Compared with the non-concomitant anti-incontinence group, the objective outcomes of reductive surgery exhibited no significant differences (100%, 78/78), and only the operation time of anti-incontinence group slightly increased 16 minutes. The occurrence rate of postoperative SUI was 12% (5/41), 15% (6/41), 17% (7/41) respectively after the operation at 2-month, 6-month and 12-month follow up in the non-concomitant anti-incontinence group; and the occurrence rate of the anti-incontinence group was 3% (1/37), 3% (1/37), 3% (1/37); but none of patients in the two groups require further surgery for stress urinary incontinence. Mean score of UDI-6 and IIQ-7 in all the patients decreased significantly after operation at 2-month, 6-month and 12-month follow up (all P < 0.01). However, there was no statistic difference between the two groups (P > 0.05).

Conclusions: It is still difficult to make decision for concomitant anti-incontinence procedure in those patients with OSUI, who are undergoing reductive surgery because of advanced POP. Whether the patients will benefit more from anti-incontinence sling depends largely on strict preoperative evaluation for the severity of SUI. The patients with severe SUI are supposed to benefit most from anti-incontinence sling. However, a two-step approach to correct the postoperative stress urinary incontinence is also reasonable.