What is the best indication for single-incision Ophira Mini Sling? Insights from a 2-year follow-up international multicentric study
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2014 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2242-4 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/37680 |
Resumo: | Introduction and hypothesis the Ophira Mini Sling System involves anchoring a midurethral, low-tension tape to the obturator internus muscles bilaterally at the level of the tendinous arc. Success rates in different subsets of patients are still to be defined. This work aims to identify which factors influence the 2-year outcomes of this treatment.Methods Analysis was based on data froma multicenter study. Endpoints for analysis included objective measurements: 1-h pad-weight (PWT), and cough stress test (CST), and questionnaires: International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF) and Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI)-6. A logistic regression analysis evaluated possible risk factors for failure.Results in all, 124 female patients with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) underwent treatment with the Ophira procedure. All patients completed 1 year of follow-up, and 95 complied with the 2-year evaluation. Longitudinal analysis showed no significant differences between results at 1 and 2 years. the 2-year overall objective results were 81 (85.3 %) patients dry, six (6.3 %) improved, and eight (8.4 %) incontinent. A multivariate analysis revealed that previous anti-incontinence surgery was the only factor that significantly influenced surgical outcomes. Two years after treatment, women with previous failed surgeries had an odds ratio (OR) for treatment failure (based on PWT) of 4.0 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.02-15.57).Conclusions the Ophira procedure is an effective option for SUI treatment, with durable good results. Previous surgeries were identified as the only significant risk factor, though previously operated patients showed an acceptable success rate. |
id |
UFSP_8bdee2e9cfcaaae6e2bf43fc273ff80d |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/37680 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
repository_id_str |
3465 |
spelling |
What is the best indication for single-incision Ophira Mini Sling? Insights from a 2-year follow-up international multicentric studyMinislingOphira procedureSingle-incision slingStress urinary incontinenceIntroduction and hypothesis the Ophira Mini Sling System involves anchoring a midurethral, low-tension tape to the obturator internus muscles bilaterally at the level of the tendinous arc. Success rates in different subsets of patients are still to be defined. This work aims to identify which factors influence the 2-year outcomes of this treatment.Methods Analysis was based on data froma multicenter study. Endpoints for analysis included objective measurements: 1-h pad-weight (PWT), and cough stress test (CST), and questionnaires: International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF) and Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI)-6. A logistic regression analysis evaluated possible risk factors for failure.Results in all, 124 female patients with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) underwent treatment with the Ophira procedure. All patients completed 1 year of follow-up, and 95 complied with the 2-year evaluation. Longitudinal analysis showed no significant differences between results at 1 and 2 years. the 2-year overall objective results were 81 (85.3 %) patients dry, six (6.3 %) improved, and eight (8.4 %) incontinent. A multivariate analysis revealed that previous anti-incontinence surgery was the only factor that significantly influenced surgical outcomes. Two years after treatment, women with previous failed surgeries had an odds ratio (OR) for treatment failure (based on PWT) of 4.0 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.02-15.57).Conclusions the Ophira procedure is an effective option for SUI treatment, with durable good results. Previous surgeries were identified as the only significant risk factor, though previously operated patients showed an acceptable success rate.Univ Estadual Campinas, Div Female Urol, Campinas, SP, BrazilFed Univ São Paulo UNIFESP, Dept Gynecol, São Paulo, BrazilAustral Univ Hosp, Dept Gynecol, Buenos Aires, DF, ArgentinaFed Univ São Paulo UNIFESP, Dept Gynecol, São Paulo, BrazilWeb of ScienceSpringerUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)Austral Univ HospPalma, Paulo Cesar RodriguesRiccetto, Cássio Luis ZanettiniBronzatto, ElaineCastro, Rodrigo [UNIFESP]Altuna, Sebastian2016-01-24T14:37:08Z2016-01-24T14:37:08Z2014-05-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion637-643application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2242-4International Urogynecology Journal. London: Springer London Ltd, v. 25, n. 5, p. 637-643, 2014.10.1007/s00192-013-2242-4WOS000335135900013.pdf0937-3462http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/37680WOS:000335135900013engInternational Urogynecology Journalinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttp://www.springer.com/open+access/authors+rights?SGWID=0-176704-12-683201-0reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESPinstname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)instacron:UNIFESP2024-08-08T08:35:36Zoai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/37680Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://www.repositorio.unifesp.br/oai/requestbiblioteca.csp@unifesp.bropendoar:34652024-08-08T08:35:36Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
What is the best indication for single-incision Ophira Mini Sling? Insights from a 2-year follow-up international multicentric study |
title |
What is the best indication for single-incision Ophira Mini Sling? Insights from a 2-year follow-up international multicentric study |
spellingShingle |
What is the best indication for single-incision Ophira Mini Sling? Insights from a 2-year follow-up international multicentric study Palma, Paulo Cesar Rodrigues Minisling Ophira procedure Single-incision sling Stress urinary incontinence |
title_short |
What is the best indication for single-incision Ophira Mini Sling? Insights from a 2-year follow-up international multicentric study |
title_full |
What is the best indication for single-incision Ophira Mini Sling? Insights from a 2-year follow-up international multicentric study |
title_fullStr |
What is the best indication for single-incision Ophira Mini Sling? Insights from a 2-year follow-up international multicentric study |
title_full_unstemmed |
What is the best indication for single-incision Ophira Mini Sling? Insights from a 2-year follow-up international multicentric study |
title_sort |
What is the best indication for single-incision Ophira Mini Sling? Insights from a 2-year follow-up international multicentric study |
author |
Palma, Paulo Cesar Rodrigues |
author_facet |
Palma, Paulo Cesar Rodrigues Riccetto, Cássio Luis Zanettini Bronzatto, Elaine Castro, Rodrigo [UNIFESP] Altuna, Sebastian |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Riccetto, Cássio Luis Zanettini Bronzatto, Elaine Castro, Rodrigo [UNIFESP] Altuna, Sebastian |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) Austral Univ Hosp |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Palma, Paulo Cesar Rodrigues Riccetto, Cássio Luis Zanettini Bronzatto, Elaine Castro, Rodrigo [UNIFESP] Altuna, Sebastian |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Minisling Ophira procedure Single-incision sling Stress urinary incontinence |
topic |
Minisling Ophira procedure Single-incision sling Stress urinary incontinence |
description |
Introduction and hypothesis the Ophira Mini Sling System involves anchoring a midurethral, low-tension tape to the obturator internus muscles bilaterally at the level of the tendinous arc. Success rates in different subsets of patients are still to be defined. This work aims to identify which factors influence the 2-year outcomes of this treatment.Methods Analysis was based on data froma multicenter study. Endpoints for analysis included objective measurements: 1-h pad-weight (PWT), and cough stress test (CST), and questionnaires: International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF) and Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI)-6. A logistic regression analysis evaluated possible risk factors for failure.Results in all, 124 female patients with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) underwent treatment with the Ophira procedure. All patients completed 1 year of follow-up, and 95 complied with the 2-year evaluation. Longitudinal analysis showed no significant differences between results at 1 and 2 years. the 2-year overall objective results were 81 (85.3 %) patients dry, six (6.3 %) improved, and eight (8.4 %) incontinent. A multivariate analysis revealed that previous anti-incontinence surgery was the only factor that significantly influenced surgical outcomes. Two years after treatment, women with previous failed surgeries had an odds ratio (OR) for treatment failure (based on PWT) of 4.0 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.02-15.57).Conclusions the Ophira procedure is an effective option for SUI treatment, with durable good results. Previous surgeries were identified as the only significant risk factor, though previously operated patients showed an acceptable success rate. |
publishDate |
2014 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2014-05-01 2016-01-24T14:37:08Z 2016-01-24T14:37:08Z |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2242-4 International Urogynecology Journal. London: Springer London Ltd, v. 25, n. 5, p. 637-643, 2014. 10.1007/s00192-013-2242-4 WOS000335135900013.pdf 0937-3462 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/37680 WOS:000335135900013 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2242-4 http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/37680 |
identifier_str_mv |
International Urogynecology Journal. London: Springer London Ltd, v. 25, n. 5, p. 637-643, 2014. 10.1007/s00192-013-2242-4 WOS000335135900013.pdf 0937-3462 WOS:000335135900013 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
International Urogynecology Journal |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://www.springer.com/open+access/authors+rights?SGWID=0-176704-12-683201-0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
http://www.springer.com/open+access/authors+rights?SGWID=0-176704-12-683201-0 |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
637-643 application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Springer |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Springer |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP instname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) instacron:UNIFESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
instacron_str |
UNIFESP |
institution |
UNIFESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
biblioteca.csp@unifesp.br |
_version_ |
1814268380780167168 |