Sun Xincheng, Yang Qingsong, Sun Feng, Shi Qinglu
Department of Urology, Cangzhou People Hospital, Cangzhou, Hebei 061000, China.
Int Braz J Urol. 2015 Mar-Apr;41(2):220-9. doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.02.06.
This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and complications between the retropubic and transobturator approaches for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) by conducting a systematic review.
We selected all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared retropubic and transobturator sling placements for treatment of SUI. We estimated pooled odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for intraoperative and postoperative outcomes and complications.
Six hundred twelve studies that compared retropubic and transobturator approaches to midurethral sling placement were identified, of which 16 were included in our research. Our study was based on results from 2646 women. We performed a subgroup analysis to compare outcomes and complications between the two approaches. The evidence to support the superior approach that leads to better objective/subjective cure rate was insufficient. The transobturator approach was associated with lower risks of bladder perforation (odds ratio (OR) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09-0.32), retropubic/vaginal hematoma (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.16-0.63), and long-term voiding dysfunction (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.17-0.61). However, the risk of thigh/groin pain seemed higher in the transobturator group (OR 2.53, 95% CI 1.72-3.72). We found no statistically significant differences in the risks of other complications between the two approaches.
This meta-analysis shows analogical objective and subjective cure rates between the retropubic and transobturator approaches to midurethral sling placement. The transobturator approach was associated with lower risks of several complications. However, good-quality studies with long-term follow-ups are warranted for further research.
本研究旨在通过系统评价比较耻骨后途径与经闭孔途径治疗女性压力性尿失禁(SUI)的有效性及并发症。
我们选取了所有比较耻骨后与经闭孔吊带置入术治疗SUI的随机对照试验(RCT)。我们对术中、术后结局及并发症的合并比值比和95%置信区间进行了估计。
共识别出612项比较耻骨后与经闭孔途径行中段尿道吊带置入术的研究,其中16项纳入我们的研究。我们的研究基于2646名女性的结果。我们进行了亚组分析以比较两种途径的结局及并发症。支持能带来更好客观/主观治愈率的优势途径的证据不足。经闭孔途径与膀胱穿孔风险较低相关(比值比(OR)0.17,95%置信区间(CI)0.09 - 0.32)、耻骨后/阴道血肿风险较低相关(OR 0.32,95% CI 0.16 - 0.63)以及长期排尿功能障碍风险较低相关(OR 0.32,95% CI 0.17 - 0.61)。然而,经闭孔组大腿/腹股沟疼痛风险似乎更高(OR 2.53,95% CI 1.72 - 3.72)。我们发现两种途径在其他并发症风险方面无统计学显著差异。
这项荟萃分析显示耻骨后与经闭孔途径行中段尿道吊带置入术的客观和主观治愈率相似。经闭孔途径与几种并发症的较低风险相关。然而,需要高质量的长期随访研究以进行进一步探究。