The evolution of incontinence into resolved, refractory and de novo urgency urinary incontinence following sling placement at time of prolapse repair in a large urodynamic cohort

PURPOSE: To improve counseling in women at risk of refractory and/or de novo urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) following sling placement at time of prolapse repair, we created an outcome model to characterize changes in storage dysfunction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 139 women who underwent urodynamics followed by sling or no sling placement at the time of prolapse repair over a 6-year period. Our primary outcome was the presence of UUI following sling placement. Data were analyzed in SAS using chi-square, Fisher's exact, Student's t-test, and Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: At baseline, the sling group had significantly higher subjective (62/81 [76.5%] vs. 18/58 [31.0%]; p<0.001), objective (62/81 [76.5%] vs. 6/58 [10.3%]; p<0.001), and occult (41/81 [50.6%] vs. 6/58 [10.3%]; p<0.001) stress urinary incontinence (SUI); and rates of subjective and objective UUI were similar to the no sling group prior to surgery. After surgery (mean follow-up 859 days) there was no difference with or without sling, in the rate of SUI (subjective, objective) and further SUI treatments (bulking agent, repeat sling). Higher rates of de novo (13/81 [16.0%] vs. 6/58 [10.3%]; p=0.454) and refractory (31/81 [38.3%] vs. 14/58 [24.1%]; p=0.048) UUI were noted in the sling group following surgery. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, a greater proportion of women in the no sling group did not report UUI at longest follow-up (hazard ratio 0.63; 95% confidence interval 0.37–1.06; p=0.081). CONCLUSIONS: Women should be counseled on the risk of de novo and refractory UUI following sling placement at time of prolapse repair.