Esteban Fuertes M, Salinas Casado J, Angulo Cuesta J, Guil Cid M, Rodríguez de Behtencourt F, Hontoria Briso J, Tamayo J C, Dehaini Dehaini A, Lera Fernández R, Resel Estévez L, Sánchez Chapado M
Servicios de Urología del Hospital Universitario, Príncipe de Asturias, Alcalá de Henares, España.
Arch Esp Urol. 1998 Jan-Feb;51(1):71-7.
To determine the utility of the urethral plug in the management of female stress urinary incontinence.
A prospective clinical study was conducted in 20 female patients with stress urinary incontinence in order to evaluate the efficacy of a new urethral plug. The mean age was 59.6 +/- 6.2 years (range 40-66). The study design included 3 visits (4 weeks). The results were considered "positive" when urinary incontinence decreased and the patient referred a subjective sensation of improvement, and "negative" if otherwise.
Positive results were demonstrated in 8 patients (40%). Ten patients (50%) refused to continue, mainly due to urinary tract infection in 7 cases (35%), difficulties in plug use (loss of plugs, anomalous urethral anatomy, cystocele,...) in 6 cases (30%) and urethral mucosa irritation in one case (5%). No plug migrated into the bladder. The initial urinary incontinence grade in the positive cases were: minor in 4 (50%), mild in 2 (25%) and severe in 2 (25%). We found no statistical relationship between the urinary incontinence grade and clinical results. The patients used a median of 5 plugs per day. Of the 10 patients who completed the study, 5 (50%) refused to continue using the plug and 5 (50%) decided to continue using the plug in combination with electrostimulation and/or pelvic floor exercises.
The use of the urethral plug in the management of female stress urinary incontinence is not an alternative to surgical treatment or pelvic floor rehabilitation. However, it could be useful for patients who are unwilling or unfit for surgery. Finally, the urethral plug is an alternative to the use of collecting systems or devices in female stress urinary incontinence.
确定尿道塞在女性压力性尿失禁治疗中的效用。
对20例女性压力性尿失禁患者进行前瞻性临床研究,以评估一种新型尿道塞的疗效。平均年龄为59.6±6.2岁(范围40 - 66岁)。研究设计包括3次就诊(4周)。当尿失禁减轻且患者自述有主观改善感觉时,结果被视为“阳性”,否则为“阴性”。
8例患者(40%)显示阳性结果。10例患者(50%)拒绝继续使用,主要原因是7例(35%)出现尿路感染,6例(30%)存在使用尿道塞困难(尿道塞丢失、尿道解剖异常、膀胱膨出等),1例(5%)出现尿道黏膜刺激。没有尿道塞移入膀胱。阳性病例的初始尿失禁分级为:轻度4例(50%),中度2例(25%),重度2例(25%)。我们发现尿失禁分级与临床结果之间无统计学关联。患者每天使用尿道塞的中位数为5个。在完成研究的10例患者中,5例(50%)拒绝继续使用尿道塞,5例(50%)决定继续将尿道塞与电刺激和/或盆底肌锻炼联合使用。
尿道塞用于女性压力性尿失禁的治疗并非手术治疗或盆底康复的替代方法。然而,对于不愿意或不适合手术的患者可能有用。最后,尿道塞是女性压力性尿失禁中收集系统或装置使用的一种替代选择。