These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison between two laparoscopic retropubic urethropexy.
    Author: Palomba S, Russo T, Iuzzolino D, Cosco C, Noia R, Arduino B, Morelli M, Zullo F.
    Journal: Minerva Chir; 2002 Jun; 57(3):323-9. PubMed ID: 12029227.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: To compare two different transperitoneal laparoscopic urethropexy procedures. METHODS: In this prospective randomized open trial, 60 women affected by genuine stress incontinence were enrolled and randomized in two groups of surgical technique. Group A was treated with transperitoneal laparoscopic retropubic urethropexy using non absorbable sutures, and group B with prolene meshes fixed with tackers or staplers. The failure rate was defined subjectively and objectively. The subjective evaluation was performed asking the patients if they had urine loss and expressing the symptomatology using a visual analog scale before surgery and after each follow-up visit. The objective evaluation was performed with clinical evaluation and/or with the use of multichannel urodynamic studies. RESULTS: No significant differences in intra- operative and postoperative complications between the two groups were observed. The subjective failure rate was not significantly different between the two groups at 3, 6, and 12 months from surgery. At 3 and 6 months follow-up, the objective failure rate was not significantly different between the two groups. Moreover, at 12 months from surgical procedure the objective failure rate was significantly lower in group A than in group B. CONCLUSIONS: Transperitoneal laparoscopic retropubic urethropexy performed using sutures is more effective than the mesh technique.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]