Cargando…

Autologous pubovaginal slings: back to the future or a lost art?

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is an under-diagnosed problem affecting up to 50% of women worldwide. SUI is a source of psychological distress to the individual and also imposes a financial burden to the individual and the health care system. The role of surgery in the treatment in SUI has evolve...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bang, Shieh-Ling, Belal, Mohammed
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4723033/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26848479
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S96957
_version_ 1782411445984559104
author Bang, Shieh-Ling
Belal, Mohammed
author_facet Bang, Shieh-Ling
Belal, Mohammed
author_sort Bang, Shieh-Ling
collection PubMed
description Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is an under-diagnosed problem affecting up to 50% of women worldwide. SUI is a source of psychological distress to the individual and also imposes a financial burden to the individual and the health care system. The role of surgery in the treatment in SUI has evolved steadily in the last two decades. The synthetic mid-urethral sling and its different insertion methods have gained widespread popularity and are now the most frequently used surgical interventions for women with SUI in Europe. As the use of synthetic slings becomes more widespread, an increasing number of complications are being reported. With the recent concerns surrounding the use of synthetic transvaginal meshes in organ prolapse surgery, synthetic slings have been put under further scrutiny. It is imperative for health care providers to be aware of the current issues associated with synthetic slings and the alternative surgical options available. Traditional autologous pubovaginal slings (PVS) have re-emerged as a viable alternative to synthetic slings in light of the issues with synthetic slings. The re-adoption of autologous PVS has however, been slow due to the technical difficulty of the surgery and perceived higher morbidity rates. In this article, we will discuss the various aspects of autologous PVS and its indications as an alternative to synthetic slings. We will also touch on the current evidence and controversies for synthetic mesh slings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4723033
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47230332016-02-04 Autologous pubovaginal slings: back to the future or a lost art? Bang, Shieh-Ling Belal, Mohammed Res Rep Urol Review Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is an under-diagnosed problem affecting up to 50% of women worldwide. SUI is a source of psychological distress to the individual and also imposes a financial burden to the individual and the health care system. The role of surgery in the treatment in SUI has evolved steadily in the last two decades. The synthetic mid-urethral sling and its different insertion methods have gained widespread popularity and are now the most frequently used surgical interventions for women with SUI in Europe. As the use of synthetic slings becomes more widespread, an increasing number of complications are being reported. With the recent concerns surrounding the use of synthetic transvaginal meshes in organ prolapse surgery, synthetic slings have been put under further scrutiny. It is imperative for health care providers to be aware of the current issues associated with synthetic slings and the alternative surgical options available. Traditional autologous pubovaginal slings (PVS) have re-emerged as a viable alternative to synthetic slings in light of the issues with synthetic slings. The re-adoption of autologous PVS has however, been slow due to the technical difficulty of the surgery and perceived higher morbidity rates. In this article, we will discuss the various aspects of autologous PVS and its indications as an alternative to synthetic slings. We will also touch on the current evidence and controversies for synthetic mesh slings. Dove Medical Press 2016-01-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4723033/ /pubmed/26848479 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S96957 Text en © 2016 Bang and Belal. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Review
Bang, Shieh-Ling
Belal, Mohammed
Autologous pubovaginal slings: back to the future or a lost art?
title Autologous pubovaginal slings: back to the future or a lost art?
title_full Autologous pubovaginal slings: back to the future or a lost art?
title_fullStr Autologous pubovaginal slings: back to the future or a lost art?
title_full_unstemmed Autologous pubovaginal slings: back to the future or a lost art?
title_short Autologous pubovaginal slings: back to the future or a lost art?
title_sort autologous pubovaginal slings: back to the future or a lost art?
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4723033/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26848479
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S96957
work_keys_str_mv AT bangshiehling autologouspubovaginalslingsbacktothefutureoralostart
AT belalmohammed autologouspubovaginalslingsbacktothefutureoralostart