Combination therapy with botulinum toxin and bulking agent-An efficient, sustainable, and safe method to treat elderly women with mixed urinary incontinence

Midurethral sling in the treatment of mixed urinary incontinence: A literature review of functional outcomes and associated factors

PURPOSE

To review the functional results of the midurethral sling (MUS) in the management of mixed urinary incontinence (MUI) and provide guidance on patient selection and the potential benefits of concomitant treatments.

METHODS

A literature review from the past 20years was conducted from the PubMed database using the terms "mixed urinary incontinence," associated to "sling," "midurethral sling," "suburethral sling," "mid-urethral sling," "sub-urethral sling," and "tension-free vaginal tape".

RESULTS

The efficacy of the MUS varies considerably depending on the definition of success used. Stress urinary incontinence resolved in 78 to 100% of patients while urge urinary incontinence (UUI) resolved in 57.4 to 82% of patients at short-term follow up. Overall urinary incontinence (UI) resolved in 58% to 85% during this time. A significant proportion of women report a high degree of satisfaction with this treatment. Long-term studies with follow-up period greater than 36months revealed a deterioration of the functional outcomes, especially for UUI. Older women with predominant UUI or detrusor overactivity on urodynamics may be at risk for poorer outcomes. Among concomitant treatments studied, OnabotulinumtoxinA injection, ospemifene, physiotherapy, percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation and surgical bladder denervation appears to offer benefits in improving UI. However, the evidence is currently insufficient to recommend their routine concomitant use.

CONCLUSION

MUS is an effective treatment for MUI. Further research is needed to better understand the potential benefits of concurrent treatments and to develop models that can predict outcomes and assist physicians in shared decision making about how to approach the management of MUI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Current Treatment of Stress Urinary Incontinence by Bulking Agents and Laser Therapy-An Update

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) affects around 20% of women. In addition to the established suburethral sling insertion, two less invasive approaches are of interest today: urethral bulking agents and vaginal laser therapy. This review discusses articles through December 2023 identified by a PubMed literature search using the keywords "incontinence" and "bulking" or "laser". Although the two approaches are less effective than sling insertions, there are specific conditions in which one or the other technique is more advantageous. Injecting bulking agents into the urethra only takes some minutes and works without general anesthesia. The method is particularly suited for elderly, frail, or obese patients with multiple comorbidities, but is also applicable for all patients and in combination with other therapies. Generally, the safety profile is good but differs between bulking materials. Two laser types-the Erbium:YAG laser with SMOOTH-mode and the fractional ablative CO2 laser-deliver heat into the tissue to induce tissue tightening and regeneration. Intravaginal laser therapy improves mild to moderate SUI, while studies describe how intraurethral laser therapy is also beneficial for severe SUI. Young women between childbirths, as well as postmenopausal women, may benefit from laser therapy. The method is safe, can be performed on an outpatient basis, and does not require any artificial material.

Management of mixed urinary incontinence: IUGA committee opinion

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Mixed urinary incontinence (MUI) is defined by the International Urogynecology Association (IUGA) and International Continence Society as the complaint of involuntary leakage of urine associated with urgency and also with exertion, effort, sneezing or coughing. It therefore implies the coexistence of both stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and urgency urinary incontinence (UUI). MUI is a heterogeneous diagnosis that requires an assessment of its individual components of SUI and UUI. Management requires an individualised approach to the symptom components. The aim of this review is to identify the assessment/investigations and management options for MUI.

METHODS

A working subcommittee from the IUGA Research & Development (R&D) Committee was created and volunteers invited from the IUGA membership. A literature review was performed to provide guidance focused on the recommended assessment and management of MUI. The document was then evaluated by the entire IUGA R&D Committee and IUGA Board of Directors and revisions made. The final document represents the IUGA R&D Committee Opinion.

RESULTS

The R&D Committee MUI opinion paper provides guidance on the assessment and management of women with MUI and summarises the evidence-based recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Mixed urinary incontinence is a complex problem and successful management requires alleviation of both the stress and urge components. Care should be individualised based on patient preferences. Further research is needed to guide patients in setting goals and to determine which component of MUI to treat first. The evidence for many of the surgical/procedural treatment options for MUI are limited and needs to be explored in more detail.

Prevalence of urinary incontinence and anal incontinence: an internet-based cross-sectional study of female Turkish University students

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

The objective of this cross-sectional, epidemiological study was to characterize urinary tract and bowel symptom prevalence and the extent of discomfort/bother associated with them. Additionally, the authors aimed to explore factors associated with both conditions among Turkish female university students. Also, an insight into women's "communication regarding urinary incontinence and anal incontinence" with their family members was sought.

METHODS

This is an internet-based national cross-sectional study. A study-specific 30-item questionnaire containing validated measures of symptom prevalence and bother (Urogenital Distress Inventory questionnaire short form and Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory) were incorporated into the survey. Out of a total of 2,125 e-mail invitations that were sent, 1,226 responded with data included in this analysis.

RESULTS

The age and BMI of all respondents were 26.53 ± 10.082, 23.45 ± 6.609 respectively. Nine hundred and eighty-five (80.5%) respondents claimed that they did not suffer a UI episode in the last year, whereas 10 people (0.08%) claimed that they had a urinary incontinence episode every day. Three hundred and fifty-seven responders (29.1%) stated that they suffered from "gas incontinence," 6 (0.5%) stool incontinence, and 20 (1.6%) declared that they had episodes of both stool and gas incontinence. Five hundred and forty-four participants (44%) reported that they had family relatives with a problem of "urinary incontinence" and 576 (47%) stated they had a conversation on "urinary incontinence." Seventy-five of the responders (6.1%) stated that they had a family member with "anal incontinence" and 246 (20.1%) responded that they had a conversation regarding "anal incontinence" with them.

CONCLUSION

We have demonstrated that the prevalence of UI was 19.5%. Twenty-nine percent stated they suffered "gas incontinence," 0.5% stool incontinence, and 1.6% declared that they had episodes of both stool and gas incontinence.