Cargando…

Particulate Versus Non-Particulate Bulking Agents In The Treatment Of Stress Urinary Incontinence

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) has been treated surgically with the midurethral sling but in recent years, this option has come under scrutiny and the risk–benefit balance continues to be reviewed. The low-risk alternative for women with uncomplicated SUI is the bulking agent, which aims to achie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chapple, Christopher, Dmochowski, Roger
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6858835/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31815111
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S220216
_version_ 1783471037348839424
author Chapple, Christopher
Dmochowski, Roger
author_facet Chapple, Christopher
Dmochowski, Roger
author_sort Chapple, Christopher
collection PubMed
description Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) has been treated surgically with the midurethral sling but in recent years, this option has come under scrutiny and the risk–benefit balance continues to be reviewed. The low-risk alternative for women with uncomplicated SUI is the bulking agent, which aims to achieve continence through coaptation of the urethra. Two classes of bulking agents can be identified: those made from solid microparticles in an absorbable liquid or gel carrier (particulate agents) and those comprising a homogenous gel (non-particulates) that resists absorption. Polydimethylsiloxane(®), carbon-coated zirconium oxide(®), calcium hydroxyapatite(®) and polyacrylate polyalcohol copolymer(®) are currently marketed particulate agents. With the exception of calcium hydroxyapatite, the particles are non-degradable. Each agent achieves its long-term bulking effect through reactive changes around the persisting particles while the carrier volume is lost. Bulkamid(®) is a non-particulate agent with the bulking effect resulting from the volume of gel injected. The lasting network of fine fibers formed by the host tissue anchors the gel in situ. Foreign-body granulomas, erosion and migration/material extrusion and loss of bulk have been observed in connection with the particle-based products. Bulkamid may be mechanistically less liable to these events; however, there are minimal data directly comparing the two types of bulking agent. The question of durability is inevitable based on their differing modes of action.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6858835
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68588352019-12-06 Particulate Versus Non-Particulate Bulking Agents In The Treatment Of Stress Urinary Incontinence Chapple, Christopher Dmochowski, Roger Res Rep Urol Review Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) has been treated surgically with the midurethral sling but in recent years, this option has come under scrutiny and the risk–benefit balance continues to be reviewed. The low-risk alternative for women with uncomplicated SUI is the bulking agent, which aims to achieve continence through coaptation of the urethra. Two classes of bulking agents can be identified: those made from solid microparticles in an absorbable liquid or gel carrier (particulate agents) and those comprising a homogenous gel (non-particulates) that resists absorption. Polydimethylsiloxane(®), carbon-coated zirconium oxide(®), calcium hydroxyapatite(®) and polyacrylate polyalcohol copolymer(®) are currently marketed particulate agents. With the exception of calcium hydroxyapatite, the particles are non-degradable. Each agent achieves its long-term bulking effect through reactive changes around the persisting particles while the carrier volume is lost. Bulkamid(®) is a non-particulate agent with the bulking effect resulting from the volume of gel injected. The lasting network of fine fibers formed by the host tissue anchors the gel in situ. Foreign-body granulomas, erosion and migration/material extrusion and loss of bulk have been observed in connection with the particle-based products. Bulkamid may be mechanistically less liable to these events; however, there are minimal data directly comparing the two types of bulking agent. The question of durability is inevitable based on their differing modes of action. Dove 2019-11-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6858835/ /pubmed/31815111 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S220216 Text en © 2019 Chapple and Dmochowski. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ 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. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Review
Chapple, Christopher
Dmochowski, Roger
Particulate Versus Non-Particulate Bulking Agents In The Treatment Of Stress Urinary Incontinence
title Particulate Versus Non-Particulate Bulking Agents In The Treatment Of Stress Urinary Incontinence
title_full Particulate Versus Non-Particulate Bulking Agents In The Treatment Of Stress Urinary Incontinence
title_fullStr Particulate Versus Non-Particulate Bulking Agents In The Treatment Of Stress Urinary Incontinence
title_full_unstemmed Particulate Versus Non-Particulate Bulking Agents In The Treatment Of Stress Urinary Incontinence
title_short Particulate Versus Non-Particulate Bulking Agents In The Treatment Of Stress Urinary Incontinence
title_sort particulate versus non-particulate bulking agents in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6858835/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31815111
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S220216
work_keys_str_mv AT chapplechristopher particulateversusnonparticulatebulkingagentsinthetreatmentofstressurinaryincontinence
AT dmochowskiroger particulateversusnonparticulatebulkingagentsinthetreatmentofstressurinaryincontinence