You have accessJournal of UrologyUrodynamics/Incontinence/Female Urology: Incontinence - Evaluation & Therapy II1 Apr 20121182 A COMPARISON OF THE OUTCOMES WITH “SURGEON-TAILORED” MESH VERSUS INDUSTRIAL KITS IN TRANSOBTURATOR TAPE SURGERY Fikret Onol, Fettah Tosun, Serdar Bugday, Ugur Boylu, Eyup Veli Kucuk, and Eyup Gumus Fikret OnolFikret Onol Istanbul, Turkey More articles by this author , Fettah TosunFettah Tosun Istanbul, Turkey More articles by this author , Serdar BugdaySerdar Bugday Istanbul, Turkey More articles by this author , Ugur BoyluUgur Boylu Istanbul, Turkey More articles by this author , Eyup Veli KucukEyup Veli Kucuk Istanbul, Turkey More articles by this author , and Eyup GumusEyup Gumus Istanbul, Turkey More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.1427AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The costs of commercial kits for transobturator tape (TOT) have limited their use in several health systems. In this study, we evaluated the outcomes of a TOT procedure done with “surgeon-tailored” mesh. METHODS Between January 2007 and May 2011, 92 women underwent outside-in TOT treatment for stress or stress predominant mixed incontinence. A 1.cm-wide strip tailored from a 30×30 cm. polypropylene mesh (Gal-Mesh™, Gallini medical devices, Mantova, Italy) was used as sling in group 1 (Figure 1), n=47) and a commercial kit (Safyre-t™, Promedon medical devices, Cordoba, Argentina) was used in group 2 (n=45). All patients underwent subjective assessment of the impact of voiding symptoms with International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ-SF), physical examination with a cough test, urinalysis, uroflowmetry and urinary tract ultrasound. Voiding and incontinence symptoms, and complications were prospectively assessed at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, and yearly thereafter. Surgical outcomes at the last follow-up and complications were compared between the two groups using Pearson's Chi-Square and Students t-tests. RESULTS Demographic characteristics and preoperative ICIQ- SF scores were similar between the groups. Follow-up in the 1st group was significantly longer (table 1)., p<0.001). At the last visit, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of the success of stress incontinence treatment (89.3% vs. 93.3%). Subjective resolution of preoperative urge symptoms was significantly higher in group 2 (table 1). “De-novo” urge symptoms developed in similar rates between the 2 groups (20% vs. 25%, p>0.05). One and 2 patients with respect to groups required mesh incision in the first postoperative month because of obstructive symptoms. Vaginal mesh erosion occured significantly higher in group 2 (0 vs. 6.6%, p<0.001). Table 1. The outcomes of surgeon-tailored mesh (group 1) and industrial kit (group 2) groups for TOT surgery at the last follow-up: number of patients (percent), Group 1 Group 2 p value Patients (n) 47 45 Follow-up (months) 28±14.46 12.1±2.07 <0.001⁎ Postop.ICIQ-SFscore 4.56±4.4 3.61±4.7 0.458⁎ Postop. 1 hr. pad test (grams) 1.32±1.73 1.53±2.49 0.415⁎ STRESS INCONTINENCE: 0.305 ⁎cured 42(89.3) 42(93.3) ⁎significantly improved 3(6.3) 2(4.4) ⁎failed 2(4.4) 1(2.3) URGE INCONTINENCE: 0.04 ⁎resolved 14(51.8) 19(57.5) ⁎significantly improved 7(25.9) 14(42.5) ⁎unchanged 6(22.3) 0(0) De-novo urgency 4(20) 3(25) 0.85 Postop. obstructive voiding 1 2 0.89 Urethra/bladder erosion 0 0 Vaginal erosion 0 3(6.6) <0.001⁎ ⁎ Students t-test, Pearson chi-square test. CONCLUSIONS “Surgeon-tailored” polypropylene mesh seems as a safe and effective sling material for TOT surgery. © 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 187Issue 4SApril 2012Page: e479 Peer Review Report Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Fikret Onol Istanbul, Turkey More articles by this author Fettah Tosun Istanbul, Turkey More articles by this author Serdar Bugday Istanbul, Turkey More articles by this author Ugur Boylu Istanbul, Turkey More articles by this author Eyup Veli Kucuk Istanbul, Turkey More articles by this author Eyup Gumus Istanbul, Turkey More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...