Laparoscopic and open Burch colposuspension for stress urinary incontinence: Advantages / disadvantages
Main Article Content
Keywords
Stress, Laparoscopy, SUI, Urinary.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Stress incontinence (SUI) causes a significant physical and psychological burden on women. Laparoscopic vaginal suspension (LC), used in the treatment of women with SUI, is known for its advantages such as smaller incisions, short hospital stay, and better aesthetic results. This article throws light upon the advantages and disadvantages of (LC) and opens up Burch vaginal (OC) incontinence along with its associated complications.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between December 1, 2017 and February 10, 2019, 26 women with SUI with physical, social, and psychological consequences from two hospitals were enrolled in this study. The sample was divided into two equal groups of 13 women each. Data were collected and statistically analyzed. P ≤ 0.05 is statistically significant.
Results: The study showed that the operational time was significantly shorter in the OC method compared to the LC approach (59.2 ± 5.3 min, 91 ± 4.5 min, respectively). Mean blood loss was higher in the OC approach than in the LC approach (152.2 ± 30.3, 143.3 ± 38.6), respectively. The LC approach has minimal pain and a shorter hospital stay compared to the OC approach. Patients with the LC approach required less analgesia (8.9 ± 1.3 mg vs 2.5 ± 1.8 mg) and less hospital stay (110.3 ± 11.4 hours vs 70.2 ± 8.9 hours) after surgery. Resumption of normal activity was faster in the LC approach (25.1 ± (12.6) days, 18.9 ± (12.5) days) than in the OC approach. There was no significant difference between the OK and LC approaches in terms of complications.
Conclusion: Although LC is a superior and less invasive approach than the Open Burch approach in terms of hospital stay, blood loss, pain and recovery time, the operation time is longer.
References
2. Richter HE, Albo ME, Zyczynski HM, Kenton K, Norton PA, Sirls LT, et al. Retropubic versus transobturator midurethral slings for stress incontinence. N Engl J Med. 2010; 362:2066-76.
3. Hunskaar S, Lose G, Sykes D. The prevalence of urinary incontinence in women in four European countries. BJU Int. 2004; 93: 324-30.
4. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M. The standardization of terminology in lower urinary tract function: report from the standardization subcommittee of the International Continence Society. Urology 2003; 61: 37-49.
5. Vancaillie TG, Schuessler W. Laparoscopic bladder neck suspension. J Laparoendos Surg. 1991; 1 (3): 169-73.
6. Dorsey JH, Cundiff G. Laparoscopic procedures for incontinence and prolapse. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 1994; 6: 223-230.
7. Fusco F, Abdel-Fattah M, Chapple CR, Creta M, La Falce S, Waltregny D et al. Updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the comparative data on colposuspensions, pubovaginal slings, and midurethral tapes in the surgical treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. Eur Urol. 2017; 72(4): 567-91.
8. Sivaslioglu AA, Caliskan E, Dolen I, Haberal A. A randomized comparison of transobturator tape and Burch colposuspension in the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007; 18 (9):1015-9.
9. Asıcıoglu O, Gungorduk K, Besımoglu B, Ertas E, Yıldırım G, Celebı I, et al. A 5-year follow-up study comparing Burch colposuspension and transobturator tape for the surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2014; 125(1): 73-7.
10. Miannay E, Cosson M, Lanvin D. Comparison of open retropubic and laparoscopic colpo suspension for treatment of stress urinary incontinence. European journal of obstetrics and gynecology and reproductive biology 1998; 79: 159-66.
11. Carey M, Goh J, Rosamilia A. Laparoscopic versus open Burch colposuspension: a randomized controlled trial. British journal of obstetrics and gynecology 2006; 113: 999-06.
12. Walter J, Abraham N, Hammer A, Hentz G, Magrina F, Cornella L, et al. Laparoscopic versus open Burch retropubic urethropexy: comparison of morbidity and costs when performed with concurrent vaginal prolapse repairs. American Journal of obstetrics and gynecology 2002; 186: 723-28.
13. Bulent Tiras M, Sendag F, Dilek U, Guner H. Laparoscopic Burch colposuspension: Comparison of effectiveness of extraperitoneal and transperitoneal techniques. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 2004; 116: 79-84.
14. Persson J, Wølner-Hanssen P. Laparoscopic Burch colposuspension for stress urinary incontinence: a randomized comparison of one or two sutures on each side of the urethra. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2000; 95:151-5.
15. Al-Grawi E.D.C. and Al-Awsi G.R.L. Expression of CDKN2A (p16/Ink4a) among Colorectal Cancer Patients: A cohort study. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research. 2018; 10 (5): 1145-1147.
16. Shamran AR, Shaker ZH, Al-Awsi GRL, Khamis AS, Tolaifeh ZA. and Jameel ZI. , 2018. Rapd-PCR is a good DNA finger-printing technique to detect phylogenetic relationships among Staphylococcus. aureus isolated from different sources in Hilla city, Iraq. Biochem Cell Arch. 2018; 18 (suppl. 1): 1157- 1161.
17. Eqbal Dohan Chalap, and Ghaidaa Raheem Lateef Al-Awsi. 2019. “A General Overview of the Genetic Effects of Extracellular Polymers For Enterococcus Faecium in Cancer Cells”. International Journal of Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences 10 (1), 436-43. https://pharmascope.org/index.php/ijrps/article/view/74.
18. Chillab Eqbal Dohan, Talib Ro'a Ali, Al-Awsi Ghaidaa Raheem Lateef, (2019). Genetics of Sickle Cell Anemia Disorders in Baghdad City, Iraq. Indian Journal of Public Health Research & Development, 10 (2): 817-822.
19. Ali A Alsudani et al 2019 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1294 062099
20. Ghaidaa Raheem Lateef Al-Awsi et al 2019 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1294 062077.
21. Ali A Alsudani and Ghaidaa Raheem Lateef Al-Awsi, 2020. Biocontrol of Rhizoctonia solani (Kühn) and Fusarium solani (Marti) causing damping-off disease in tomato with Azotobacter chroococcum and Pseudomonas fluorescens. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, 23: 1456-1461.
22. Ghaidaa Raheem Lateef Al-Awsi et al 2021 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 790 012013.
23. Bassam F. ALfarhani et al 2021 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 790 012037
24. Bassam F. ALfarhani et al 2021 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 790 012040
25. Alfarhani, B.F., Hammza, R.A. & Alzaidy, A.S. Potential effect of solvent and slit width on some properties of room temperature fluorescence of hydroxy polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Chem. Pap. 75, 3915–3920 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11696-021-01602-1
26. S. H. Ewiad, B. F. Al-Farhani, S. A. Abed, and N. Al-Ansari, ‘Modeling of trihalomethane compounds formation in Baghdad water supply network’, Scientific Review Engineering and Environmental Sciences, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 136–144, 2020.
27. Bassam Faron Alfarhani et al 2019 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1294 052045
28. Bassam Alfarhani, Maha Al-Tameemi, Hector C. Goicoechea, Fernando Barbosa, Andres D. Campiglia, Direct analysis of benzo[a]pyrene metabolites with strong overlapping in both the spectral and lifetime domains, Microchemical Journal, 137 2018, 51-61,
29. B. Alfarhani, M. Al-tameemi, A.V. Schenone, H.C. Goicoechea, F. Barbosa, A.D. Campiglia. Microchem. J., 2016 129 83–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2016.06.010
30. Polascik T, Moore R, Rosenerg M, Kavoussi L. Comparison of laparoscopic and open retropubic urethropexy for treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Urology1995; 45: 647-52.
31. Ankardal M, Ekerydh A, Crafoord K, Milsom I, Stjerndahl JH, Engh ME. A randomized trial comparing open Burch colposuspension using sutures with laparoscopic colposuspension using mesh and staples in women with stress urinary incontinence. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2004; 111: 974-81.
32. Fatthy H, El Hao M, Samaha I, Abdallah K. Modified Burch Colposuspension: Laparoscopy versus Laparotomy. The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists 2001; 8(1): 99-06.
33. Kitchener H, Dunn G, Reid F. Laparoscopic versus open colposuspension results of a prospective randomized controlled trial. International journal of obstetrics and gynaecology 2006; 113: 1007-13.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.