Prospective study of a single-incision sling versus a transobturator sling in women with stress urinary incontinence: 3-year results.

BACKGROUND

Long-term safety and efficacy data on use of single-incision slings in stress urinary incontinence are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the single-incision sling Solyx (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA) is noninferior to the transobturator sling Obtryx II (Boston Scientific) in efficacy and safety for treatment of stress urinary incontinence. This 522 post-market surveillance study has been designed in response to a Food and Drug Administration request to evaluate improvement in stress urinary incontinence at 36 months following single-incision sling compared with baseline, as well as provide an assessment of mesh-related complications and subject-reported outcomes, relative to the transobturator sling control.

STUDY DESIGN

This prospective, nonrandomized, parallel cohort, multicenter postapproval study enrolled subjects to receive single-incision sling or transobturator sling. Study sites were assigned to a cohort group based on documented competency with the cohort device. Patient follow-up was 36 months to compare efficacy and adverse events for noninferiority. Inclusion criteria included stress predominant urinary incontinence, a positive cough stress test, and post-void residual ≤150 cc. Participants were ineligible if they had undergone previous stress urinary incontinence surgery or had a previous mesh complication. Primary endpoint was treatment success defined by composite negative cough stress test and subjective improvement in stress urinary incontinence using Patient Global Impression of Improvement at 36 months. Secondary endpoints included adverse events and indications for retreatment. Noninferiority margins of 15% and 10% were prespecified for the primary efficacy and safety endpoints. Data analysis was performed using intent-to-treat and per-protocol methods. Due to the observational nature of the study, a propensity score methodology was applied to account for differences in patient and surgeon characteristics between treatment groups. The study design and variables to be included in the propensity score model were reviewed and approved by Food and Drug Administration reviewers before outcome analyses were performed.

RESULTS

No evidence of imbalance in baseline characteristics was observed between groups after propensity score stratification in the 281 subjects. EBL (72.3±92 vs 73.1±63.9 mL, P=.786), time to spontaneous void (1.1±2 vs 0.8±2.8 days, P=.998), and time to discharge (0.7±0.7 vs 0.6±0.6 days, P=.524) were similar between groups. At 36 months, treatment success was 90.4% in the single-incision sling group and 88.9% in the transobturator sling group (P=.93). At 36 months, mesh-related complications were similar between groups (mesh exposure: 2.8% vs 5.0%, P=.38). Serious adverse events including pain during intercourse (0.7% vs 0%, P=1.00), pelvic pain (0.7% vs 0%, P=1.00), and urinary retention (2.8% vs 4.3%, P=.54) were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

Single-incision sling was not inferior to transobturator sling for long-term treatment success of stress urinary incontinence. The rates of serious adverse events were acceptably low and similar between groups.