Is there still a place for the pubovaginal sling at the bladder neck in the era of the midurethral sling?

Abstract

Perhaps the most significant advance in the modern-day surgical management of stress urinary incontinence is the introduction of the tension-free midurethral sling procedures. Based on a theory of anatomy and function, which emphasizes the importance of the midurethra in maintaining continence during stress, these minimally invasive procedures are being used widely in the surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence. As surgeons continue to experience excellent early results, a major concern is defining the role of the traditional pubovaginal sling placed at the bladder neck. In addition to the obvious indications to consider a more traditional sling procedure (markedly atrophic vaginal wall or situations that may promote sling erosion), are there other clinical scenarios in which there still is a role for the traditional pubovaginal sling? Several clinical conditions that warrant consideration of a traditional sling procedure are presented in this review. Based on the mechanism of action and clinical data demonstrating decreased efficacy of midurethral sling procedures, we propose that a traditional pubovaginal sling be considered in the following clinical conditions: lack of urethral mobility, mixed urinary incontinence, concomitant urethral reconstruction, and after a failed sling procedure. In the absence of randomized control trials, we present evidence that makes a case for consideration of the traditional sling procedure in these complex clinical conditions.