The cost of urogynaecological treatments: Which are more cost-effective?

Laparoscopic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colposuspension was one of the first minimal access operations for treating stress urinary incontinence in women, with the presumed advantages of shorter hospital stays and quicker return to normal activities. This Cochrane Review was last updated in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of laparoscopic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women; and summarise the principal findings of relevant economic evaluations of these interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register (22 May 2019), which contains trials identified from CENTRAL, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of women with urinary incontinence that included laparoscopic surgery in at least one arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently extracted data from eligible trials, assessed risk of bias and implemented GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 26 trials involving 2271 women. Thirteen trials (1304 women) compared laparoscopic colposuspension to open colposuspension and nine trials (412 women) to midurethral sling procedures. One trial (161 women) compared laparoscopic colposuspension with one suture to laparoscopic colposuspension with two sutures; and three trials (261 women) compared laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures to laparoscopic colposuspension with mesh and staples. The majority of trials did not follow up participants beyond 18 months. Overall, there was unclear risk of selection, performance and detection bias and generally low risk of attrition and reporting bias. There is little difference between laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures and open colposuspension for subjective cure within 18 months (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99 to 1.08; 6 trials, 755 women; high-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether laparoscopic colposuspension using mesh and staples is better or worse than open colposuspension for subjective cure within 18 months (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93; 3 trials, 362 women; very low-quality evidence) or whether there is a greater risk of repeat continence surgery with laparoscopic colposuspension. Laparoscopic colposuspension may have a lower risk of perioperative complications (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.94; 11 trials, 1369 women; low-quality evidence). There may be similar or higher rates of bladder perforations with laparoscopic colposuspension (RR 1.72, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.29; 10 trials, 1311 women; moderate-quality evidence). Rates for de novo detrusor overactivity (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.30; 5 trials, 472 women) and voiding dysfunction (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.31; 5 trials, 507 women) may be similar but we are uncertain due to the wide confidence interval. Five studies reported on quality of life but we could not synthesise the data. There may be little difference between laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures and tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) for subjective cure within 18 months (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.16; 4 trials, 256 women; low-quality evidence) or between laparoscopic colposuspension using mesh and staples and TVT (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.91; 1 trial, 121 women; low-quality evidence). For laparoscopic colposuspension compared with midurethral slings, there may be lower rates of repeat continence surgery (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.62; 1 trial, 70 women; low-quality evidence) and similar risk of perioperative complications (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.64; 7 trials, 514 women; low-quality evidence) but we are uncertain due to the wide confidence intervals. There may be little difference in terms of de novo detrusor overactivity (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.88; 4 trials, 326 women; low-quality evidence); and probably little difference in terms of voiding dysfunction (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.41; 5 trials, 412 women; moderate-quality evidence) although we are uncertain due to the wide confidence interval. Five studies reported on quality of life but we could not synthesise the data. No studies reported on bladder perforations. Low-quality evidence indicates that there may be higher subjective cure rates within 18 months with two sutures compared to one suture (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.64; 1 trial, 158 women). Comparing one suture and two sutures, one suture may have lower rates of repeat continence surgery (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.37; 1 trial, 157 women) and similar risk of perioperative complications (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.70) but we are uncertain due to the wide 95% CIs. There may be higher rates of voiding dysfunction with one suture compared to two sutures (RR 2.82; 95% CI 0.30 to 26.54; 1 trial, 158 women; low-quality evidence), but we are uncertain due to the wide confidence interval. This trial did not report bladder perforations, de novo detrusor overactivity or quality of life. We are uncertain whether laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures is better or worse for subjective cure within 18 months compared to mesh and staples (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.59; 2 trials, 180 women; very low-quality evidence) or in terms of repeat continence surgery (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.06 to 14.91; 1 trial, 69 women; very low-quality evidence). Laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures may increase the number of perioperative complications compared to mesh and staples (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.09 to 3.48; 3 trials, 260 women; low-quality evidence) but rates of de novo detrusor overactivity may be similar (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.17 to 3.06; 2 trials, 122 women; low-quality evidence), however, we are uncertain due to the wide confidence interval. None of the studies reported bladder perforations, voiding dysfunction or quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The data indicate that, in terms of subjective cure of incontinence within 18 months, there is probably little difference between laparoscopic colposuspension and open colposuspension, or between laparoscopic colposuspension and midurethral sling procedures. Much of the evidence is low quality, meaning that a considerable degree of uncertainty remains about laparoscopic colposuspension. Future trials should recruit adequate numbers, conduct long-term follow-up and measure clinically important outcomes. A brief economic commentary identified three studies. We have not quality-assessed them and they should be interpreted in light of the findings on clinical effectiveness.

Heterogeneity of cost estimates in health economic evaluation research. A systematic review of stress urinary incontinence studies

Introduction and hypothesis

There is increased demand for an international overview of cost estimates and insight into the variation affecting these estimates. Understanding of these costs is useful for cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) research into new treatment modalities and for clinical guideline development.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE & other non-indexed materials and Ovid Embase for articles published between 1995 and 2017. The National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS-EED) filter and the McMaster sensitive therapy filter were combined with a bespoke search strategy for stress urinary incontinence (SUI). We extracted unit cost estimates, assessed variability and methodology, and determined transferability.

Results

We included 37 studies in this review. Four hundred and eighty-two cost estimates from 13 countries worldwide were extracted. Descriptive analysis shows that hospital stay in gynecology ranged between €82 and €1,292 per day. Costs of gynecological consultation range from €30 in France to €158 in Sweden. In the UK, costs are estimated at €228 per hour. Costs of a tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) device range from €431 in Finland to €994 in Canada. TVT surgery per minute costs €25 in France and €82 in Sweden. Total costs of TVT range from €1,224 in Ireland to €5,809 for inpatient care in France. Variation was explored.

Conclusions

Heterogeneity was observed in cost estimates for all units at all levels of health care. CEAs of SUI interventions cannot be interpreted without bias when the base of these analyses—namely costs—cannot be compared and generalized.

Laparoscopic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women

BACKGROUND

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) imposes significant health and economic burden on society and the women affected. Laparoscopic colposuspension was one of the first minimal access operations for the treatment of women with SUI, with the presumed advantages of avoiding major incisions, shorter hospital stays and quicker return to normal activities.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of laparoscopic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Trials Register (searched 2 July 2009), and sought additional trials from other sources and by contacting study authors for unpublished data and trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in women with symptomatic or urodynamic diagnosis of stress or mixed incontinence that included laparoscopic surgery as the intervention in at least one arm of the studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The review authors evaluated trials for methodological quality and their appropriateness for inclusion in the review. Two review authors extracted data and another cross checked them. Where appropriate, we calculated a summary statistic.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 22 eligible trials. Ten involved the comparison of laparoscopic with open colposuspension. Whilst the women's subjective impression of cure seemed similar for both procedures, in the short- and medium-term follow-up, there was some evidence of poorer results of laparoscopic colposuspension on objective outcomes. The results showed trends towards fewer perioperative complications, less postoperative pain and shorter hospital stay for laparoscopic compared with open colposuspension, however, laparoscopic colposuspension was more costly.Eight studies compared laparoscopic colposuspension with newer 'self-fixing' vaginal slings. There were no significant differences in the reported short- and long-term subjective cure rates of the two procedures but objective cure rates at 18 months favoured slings. We observed no significant differences for postoperative voiding dysfunction and perioperative complications. Laparoscopic colposuspension had a significantly longer operation time and hospital stay. We found significantly higher subjective and objective one-year cure rates for women randomised to two paravaginal sutures compared with one suture in a single trial. Three studies compared sutures with mesh and staples for laparoscopic colposuspension and showed a trend towards favouring the use of sutures.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently available evidence suggests that laparoscopic colposuspension may be as good as open colposuspension at two years post surgery. However, the newer vaginal sling procedures appear to offer even greater benefits, better objective outcomes in the short term and similar subjective outcomes in the longer term. If laparoscopic colposuspension is performed, the use of two paravaginal sutures appears to be the most effective method. The place of laparoscopic colposuspension in clinical practice should become clearer when there are more data available describing long-term results. A brief economic commentary (BEC) identified three studies suggesting that tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) may be more cost-effective compared with laparoscopic colposuspension but laparoscopic colposuspension may be slightly more cost-effective when compared with open colposuspension after 24 months follow-up.

Open retropubic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women

BACKGROUND

Urinary incontinence is a common and potentially debilitating problem. Stress urinary, incontinence as the most common type of incontinence, imposes significant health and economic burdens on society and the women affected. Open retropubic colposuspension is a surgical treatment which involves lifting the tissues near the bladder neck and proximal urethra in the area behind the anterior pubic bones to correct deficient urethral closure to correct stress urinary incontinence.

OBJECTIVES

The review aimed to determine the effects of open retropubic colposuspension for the treatment of urinary incontinence in women. A secondary aim was to assess the safety of open retropubic colposuspension in terms of adverse events caused by the procedure.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 5 May 2015), and the reference lists of relevant articles. We contacted investigators to locate extra studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in women with symptoms or urodynamic diagnoses of stress or mixed urinary incontinence that included open retropubic colposuspension surgery in at least one trial group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were evaluated for methodological quality or susceptibility to bias and appropriateness for inclusion and data extracted by two of the review authors. Trial data were analysed by intervention. Where appropriate, a summary statistic was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 55 trials involving a total of 5417 women.Overall cure rates were 68.9% to 88.0% for open retropubic colposuspension. Two small studies suggested lower incontinence rates after open retropubic colposuspension compared with conservative treatment. Similarly, one trial suggested lower incontinence rates after open retropubic colposuspension compared to anticholinergic treatment. Evidence from six trials showed a lower incontinence rate after open retropubic colposuspension than after anterior colporrhaphy. Such benefit was maintained over time (risk ratio (RR) for incontinence 0.46; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.72 before the first year, RR 0.37; 95% CI 0.27 to 0.51 at one to five years, RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.75 in periods beyond five years).Evidence from 22 trials in comparison with suburethral slings (traditional slings or trans-vaginal tape or transobturator tape) found no overall significant difference in incontinence rates in all time periods evaluated (as assessed subjectively RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.18, within one year of treatment, RR 1.18; 95%CI 1.01 to 1.39 between one and five years, RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.27 at five years and more, and as assessed objectively RR 1.24; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.67 within one year of treatment, RR 1.12; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.54 for one to five years follow up, RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.30 to 1.64 at more than five years). However, subgroup analysis of studies comparing traditional slings and open colposuspension showed better effectiveness with traditional slings in the medium and long term (RR 1.35; 95% CI 1.11 to 1.64 from one to five years follow up, RR 1.19; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.37).In comparison with needle suspension, there was a lower incontinence rate after colposuspension in the first year after surgery (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.03), after the first year (RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.39 to 0.81), and beyond five years (RR 0.32; 95% CI 15 to 0.71).Patient-reported incontinence rates at short, medium and long-term follow-up showed no significant differences between open and laparoscopic retropubic colposuspension, but with wide confidence intervals. In two trials incontinence was less common after the Burch (RR 0.38; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.76) than after the Marshall Marchetti Krantz procedure at one to five year follow-up. There were few data at any other follow-up times.In general, the evidence available does not show a higher morbidity or complication rate with open retropubic colposuspension compared to the other open surgical techniques, although pelvic organ prolapse is more common than after anterior colporrhaphy and sling procedures. Voiding problems are also more common after sling procedures compared to open colposuspension.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Open retropubic colposuspension is an effective treatment modality for stress urinary incontinence especially in the long term. Within the first year of treatment, the overall continence rate is approximately 85% to 90%. After five years, approximately 70% of women can expect to be dry. Newer minimal access sling procedures look promising in comparison with open colposuspension but their long-term performance is limited and closer monitoring of their adverse event profile must be carried out. Open colposuspension is associated with a higher risk of pelvic organ prolapse compared to sling operations and anterior colporrhaphy, but with a lower risk of voiding dysfunction compared to traditional sling surgery. Laparoscopic colposuspension should allow speedier recovery but its relative safety and long-term effectiveness is not yet known. A Brief Economic Commentary (BEC) identified five studies suggesting that tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) and laparoscopic colposuspension may be more cost-effective compared with open retropubic colposuspension.

Open retropubic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women

BACKGROUND

Urinary incontinence is a common and potentially debilitating problem. Open retropubic colposuspension is a surgical treatment which involves lifting the tissues near the bladder neck and proximal urethra in the area behind the anterior pubic bones to correct deficient urethral closure to correct stress urinary incontinence.

OBJECTIVES

The review aimed to determine the effects of open retropubic colposuspension for the treatment of urinary incontinence in women. A secondary aim was to assess the safety of open retropubic colposuspension in terms of adverse events caused by the procedure.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 5 May 2015), and the reference lists of relevant articles. We contacted investigators to locate extra studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in women with symptoms or urodynamic diagnoses of stress or mixed urinary incontinence that included open retropubic colposuspension surgery in at least one trial group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were evaluated for methodological quality or susceptibility to bias and appropriateness for inclusion and data extracted by two of the review authors. Trial data were analysed by intervention. Where appropriate, a summary statistic was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 55 trials involving a total of 5417 women.Overall cure rates were 68.9% to 88.0% for open retropubic colposuspension. Two small studies suggested lower incontinence rates after open retropubic colposuspension compared with conservative treatment. Similarly, one trial suggested lower incontinence rates after open retropubic colposuspension compared to anticholinergic treatment. Evidence from six trials showed a lower incontinence rate after open retropubic colposuspension than after anterior colporrhaphy. Such benefit was maintained over time (risk ratio (RR) for incontinence 0.46; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.72 before the first year, RR 0.37; 95% CI 0.27 to 0.51 at one to five years, RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.75 in periods beyond five years).Evidence from 22 trials in comparison with suburethral slings (traditional slings or trans-vaginal tape or transobturator tape) found no overall significant difference in incontinence rates in all time periods evaluated (as assessed subjectively RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.18, within one year of treatment, RR 1.18; 95%CI 1.01 to 1.39 between one and five years, RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.27 at five years and more, and as assessed objectively RR 1.24; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.67 within one year of treatment, RR 1.12; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.54 for one to five years follow up, RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.30 to 1.64 at more than five years). However, subgroup analysis of studies comparing traditional slings and open colposuspension showed better effectiveness with traditional slings in the medium and long term (RR 1.35; 95% CI 1.11 to 1.64 from one to five years follow up, RR 1.19; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.37).In comparison with needle suspension, there was a lower incontinence rate after colposuspension in the first year after surgery (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.03), after the first year (RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.39 to 0.81), and beyond five years (RR 0.32; 95% CI 15 to 0.71).Patient-reported incontinence rates at short, medium and long-term follow-up showed no significant differences between open and laparoscopic retropubic colposuspension, but with wide confidence intervals. In two trials incontinence was less common after the Burch (RR 0.38; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.76) than after the Marshall Marchetti Krantz procedure at one to five year follow-up. There were few data at any other follow-up times.In general, the evidence available does not show a higher morbidity or complication rate with open retropubic colposuspension compared to the other open surgical techniques, although pelvic organ prolapse is more common than after anterior colporrhaphy and sling procedures. Voiding problems are also more common after sling procedures compared to open colposuspension.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Open retropubic colposuspension is an effective treatment modality for stress urinary incontinence especially in the long term. Within the first year of treatment, the overall continence rate is approximately 85% to 90%. After five years, approximately 70% of women can expect to be dry. Newer minimal access sling procedures look promising in comparison with open colposuspension but their long-term performance is limited and closer monitoring of their adverse event profile must be carried out. Open colposuspension is associated with a higher risk of pelvic organ prolapse compared to sling operations and anterior colporrhaphy, but with a lower risk of voiding dysfunction compared to traditional sling surgery. Laparoscopic colposuspension should allow speedier recovery but its relative safety and long-term effectiveness is not yet known.

Open retropubic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women

BACKGROUND

Urinary incontinence is a common and potentially debilitating problem. Open retropubic colposuspension is a surgical treatment which involves lifting the tissues near the bladder neck and proximal urethra in the area behind the anterior pubic bones to correct deficient urethral closure.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of open retropubic colposuspension for the treatment of urinary incontinence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register (searched 13 March 2012), which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and CINAHL, and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings, and the reference lists of relevant articles. We contacted investigators to locate extra studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in women with symptoms or urodynamic diagnoses of stress or mixed urinary incontinence that included open retropubic colposuspension surgery in at least one trial group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were evaluated for methodological quality or susceptibility to bias and appropriateness for inclusion and data extracted by two of the review authors. Trial data were analysed by intervention. Where appropriate, a summary statistic was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 53 trials involving a total of 5244 women.Overall cure rates were 68.9% to 88.0% for open retropubic colposuspension. Two small studies suggested lower incontinence rates after open retropubic colposuspension compared with conservative treatment. Similarly, one trial suggested lower incontinence rates after open retropubic colposuspension compared to anticholinergic treatment. Evidence from six trials showed a lower incontinence rate after open retropubic colposuspension than after anterior colporrhaphy. Such benefit was maintained over time (risk ratio (RR) for incontinence 0.51; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.76 before the first year, RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.57 at one to five years, RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.75 in periods beyond five years).Evidence from 20 trials in comparison with suburethral slings (trans-vaginal tape or transobturator tape) found no significant difference in incontinence rates in all time periods assessed.In comparison with needle suspension, there was a lower incontinence rate after colposuspension in the first year after surgery (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.03), after the first year (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.71), and beyond five years (RR 0.32; 95% CI 15 to 0.71).Patient-reported incontinence rates at short, medium and long-term follow-up showed no significant differences between open and laparoscopic retropubic colposuspension, but with wide confidence intervals. In two trials incontinence was less common after the Burch (RR 0.38; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.76) than after the Marshall Marchetti Krantz procedure at one to five year follow-up. There were few data at any other follow-up times.In general, the evidence available does not show a higher morbidity or complication rate with open retropubic colposuspension compared to the other open surgical techniques, although pelvic organ prolapse is more common than after anterior colporrhaphy and sling procedures.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Open retropubic colposuspension is an effective treatment modality for stress urinary incontinence especially in the long term. Within the first year of treatment, the overall continence rate is approximately 85% to 90%. After five years, approximately 70% of patients can expect to be dry. Newer minimal access procedures such as tension-free vaginal tape look promising in comparison with open colposuspension but their long-term performance is not known and closer monitoring of their adverse event profile must be carried out. Laparoscopic colposuspension should allow speedier recovery but its relative safety and long-term effectiveness is not known yet.

Open retropubic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women

BACKGROUND

Urinary incontinence is a common and potentially debilitating problem. Open retropubic colposuspension is a surgical treatment which involves lifting the tissues near the bladder neck and proximal urethra in the area behind the anterior pubic bones to correct deficient urethral closure.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of open retropubic colposuspension for the treatment of urinary incontinence.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register (searched 30 June 2008) and reference lists of relevant articles. We contacted investigators to locate extra studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in women with symptoms or urodynamic diagnoses of stress or mixed urinary incontinence that included open retropubic colposuspension surgery in at least one trial group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were evaluated for methodological quality/susceptibility to bias and appropriateness for inclusion and data extracted by two of the reviewers. Trial data were analysed by intervention. Where appropriate, a summary statistic was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 46 trials involving a total of 4738 women.Overall cure rates were 68.9% to 88.0% for open retropubic colposuspension. Two small studies suggest lower failure rates after open retropubic colposuspension compared with conservative treatment. Similarly, one trial suggests lower failure rates after open retropubic colposuspension compared to anticholinergic treatment. Evidence from six trials showed a lower failure rate for subjective cure after open retropubic colposuspension than after anterior colporrhaphy. Such benefit was maintained over time (RR of failure 0.51; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.76 before the first year, RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.57 at one to five years, RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.75 in periods beyond 5 years). In comparison with needle suspensions there was a lower failure rate after colposuspension in the first year after surgery (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.03), after the first year (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.71), and beyond five years (RR 0.32; 95% CI 15 to 0.71). Evidence from twelve trials in comparison with suburethral slings found no significant difference in failure rates in all time periods assessed. Patient-reported failure rates in short, medium and long-term follow-up showed no significant difference between open and laparoscopic retropubic colposuspension, but with wide confidence intervals. In two trials failure was less common after Burch (RR 0.38 95% CI 0.18 to 0.76) than after the Marshall Marchetti Krantz procedure at one to five year follow-up. There were few data at any other follow-up time.In general, the evidence available does not show a higher morbidity or complication rate with open retropubic colposuspension, compared to the other open surgical techniques, although pelvic organ prolapse is more common than after anterior colporrhaphy and sling procedures.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence available indicates that open retropubic colposuspension is an effective treatment modality for stress urinary incontinence especially in the long term. Within the first year of treatment, the overall continence rate is approximately 85 to 90%. After five years, approximately 70% of patients can expect to be dry. Newer minimal access procedures like tension free vaginal tape look promising in comparison with open colposuspension but their long-term performance is not known and closer monitoring of its adverse event profile must be done. Laparoscopic colposuspension should allow speedier recovery but its relative safety and effectiveness is not known yet.

Open retropubic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women

BACKGROUND

Urinary incontinence is a common and potentially debilitating problem. Open retropubic colposuspension is a surgical treatment which involves lifting the tissues near the bladder neck and proximal urethra in the area behind the anterior pubic bones to correct deficient urethral closure.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of open retropubic colposuspension for the treatment of urinary incontinence.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register (searched 30 June 2008) and reference lists of relevant articles. We contacted investigators to locate extra studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in women with symptoms or urodynamic diagnoses of stress or mixed urinary incontinence that included open retropubic colposuspension surgery in at least one trial group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were evaluated for methodological quality/susceptibility to bias and appropriateness for inclusion and data extracted by two of the reviewers. Trial data were analysed by intervention. Where appropriate, a summary statistic was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 46 trials involving a total of 4738 women.Overall cure rates were 68.9% to 88.0% for open retropubic colposuspension. Two small studies suggest lower failure rates after open retropubic colposuspension compared with conservative treatment. Similarly, one trial suggests lower failure rates after open retropubic colposuspension compared to anticholinergic treatment. Evidence from six trials showed a lower failure rate for subjective cure after open retropubic colposuspension than after anterior colporrhaphy. Such benefit was maintained over time (RR of failure 0.51; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.76 before the first year, RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.57 at one to five years, RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.75 in periods beyond 5 years). In comparison with needle suspensions there was a lower failure rate after colposuspension in the first year after surgery (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.03), after the first year (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.71), and beyond five years (RR 0.32; 95% CI 15 to 0.71). Evidence from twelve trials in comparison with suburethral slings found no significant difference in failure rates in all time periods assessed. Patient-reported failure rates in short, medium and long-term follow-up showed no significant difference between open and laparoscopic retropubic colposuspension, but with wide confidence intervals. In two trials failure was less common after Burch (RR 0.38 95% CI 0.18 to 0.76) than after the Marshall Marchetti Krantz procedure at one to five year follow-up. There were few data at any other follow-up time.In general, the evidence available does not show a higher morbidity or complication rate with open retropubic colposuspension, compared to the other open surgical techniques, although pelvic organ prolapse is more common than after anterior colporrhaphy and sling procedures.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence available indicates that open retropubic colposuspension is an effective treatment modality for stress urinary incontinence especially in the long term. Within the first year of treatment, the overall continence rate is approximately 85 to 90%. After five years, approximately 70% of patients can expect to be dry. Newer minimal access procedures like tension free vaginal tape look promising in comparison with open colposuspension but their long-term performance is not known and closer monitoring of its adverse event profile must be done. Laparoscopic colposuspension should allow speedier recovery but its relative safety and effectiveness is not known yet.

Laparoscopic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colposuspension was one of the first minimal access operations for the treatment of women with stress urinary incontinence, with the presumed advantages over traditional Burch colposuspension of avoiding major incisions, shorter hospital stay, and quicker return to normal activities. A variety of approaches and methods are used.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of laparoscopic colposuspension for urinary incontinence.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Trials Register (searched 21 September 2005). Additional trials were sought from other sources such as reference lists, reviews and researchers and authors were contacted for unpublished data and trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in women with symptomatic or urodynamic diagnosis of stress or mixed incontinence that included laparoscopic surgery in at least one arm of the study.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trials were evaluated for methodological quality and appropriateness for inclusion by the reviewers. Data were extracted by two of the reviewers and cross checked by another. Trial data were analysed by intervention. Where appropriate, a summary statistic was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-one eligible trials were identified. Nine involved the comparison of laparoscopic with open colposuspension. Whilst the women's subjective impression of cure seemed similar for both procedures in the short and medium term follow-up, there was some evidence of poorer results of laparoscopic colposuspension, within 18 months, on objective outcomes. Two poor quality trials reported conflicting long term results (after five years) for this comparison. No significant differences were observed for post-operative urgency, voiding dysfunction or de novo detrusor overactivity. Trends were shown towards a lower perioperative complication rate, longer operating time, less intraoperative blood loss, less postoperative pain, shorter hospital stay, quicker return to normal activities, and shorter duration of catheterisation for laparoscopic compared with open colposuspension. Benefits did not come without a price, as laparoscopic colposuspension in the short term is more costly.Eight studies compared laparoscopic colposuspension with newer 'self-fixing' vaginal slings. Overall there were no significant differences in the reported subjective cure rates of the two procedures, however vaginal sling procedures did have significantly higher objective cure rates at 18 months. No significant differences were observed for post-operative voiding dysfunction, de novo detrusor activity and perioperative complications. Laparoscopic colposuspension has a significantly longer operation time, longer hospital stay and slower return to normal activities when compared to the sling procedures. Significantly higher subjective and objective (dry on 'ultrashort' pad test) one year cure rates were found for women randomised to two paravaginal sutures compared with one suture in a single trial (89% versus 65% and 83% versus 58% respectively). Two small studies compared sutures with mesh and staples for laparoscopic colposuspension and the comparisons, although showing a trend towards favouring the sutures, were not significant. One study compared transperitoneal with extraperitoneal access for laparoscopic colposuspension but it was also small and of poor quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The long-term performance of laparoscopic colposuspension remains uncertain. Currently available evidence suggests that it may be as good as open colposuspension at two years post surgery. Like other laparoscopically performed operations, patients having laparoscopic colposuspension recovered quicker, but the operation itself took longer to perform. However, the newer vaginal sling procedures appear to offer even greater benefits of minimal access surgery and better objective outcomes in the short-term. If laparoscopic colposuspension is performed, two paravaginal sutures appear to be more effective than one. The place of laparoscopic colposuspension in clinical practice should become clearer when ongoing trials are reported and when there are more data available describing long-term cure results.