Mini Sling (Ophira) versus Pubovaginal Sling for Treatment of Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Medium-term Follow-up

Impact of Single-Incision Sling Placement on Female Sexual Function in Women with Stress Urinary Incontinence

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a common condition among women of childbearing age, often requiring surgical intervention. The midurethral sling (MUS), including first-generation tension-free vaginal tapes (TVT) and second-generation transobturator tapes (TOT, TVT-O), has long been the standard treatment. However, both approaches have associated risks, prompting the development of single-incision slings (SIS) as a third option. SIS have proven their efficacy in SUI treatment, but the impact of these slings on female sexual function specifically remains underexplored.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using PubMed using the keywords "stress urinary incontinence," "midurethral slings," "single-incision slings," "female sexual function," and "dyspareunia."

RESULTS

The reviewed studies demonstrated that SIS generally maintain or improve sexual function postoperatively, but with varying impact on specific aspects of sexual function. While coital urinary incontinence often improved or resolved, new or worsened dyspareunia was reported in a significant number of patients.

CONCLUSION

SIS placement for SUI generally preserves or enhances sexual function, though individual aspects, such as dyspareunia, may worsen for some patients. Given that an important goal of SUI treatment is to improve quality of life, it is crucial to identify preoperative factors that will identify patients at risk of developing dyspareunia after surgery or are more likely to experience an improvement in sexual function. Further research is needed to better understand these predictors and optimize surgical outcomes for women undergoing SUI treatment with SIS.

Instruments Used for the Assessment of SUI Severity in Urogynecologic Surgical Trials: A Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Various instruments are used to evaluate the severity of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in clinical trials for SUI surgery. We conducted a scoping review with the primary aim of investigating the use of such instruments.

METHODS

A comprehensive search in PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP was carried out. Inclusion criteria were studies including patients undergoing surgical intervention for SUI with assessment of SUI severity performed pre- and post-operatively. Exclusion criteria were nonprospective studies, nonrandomized studies, studies not in the English language, and the absence of reporting the methods of SUI severity evaluation in the study.

RESULTS

In total, 8,886 articles were identified, yielding 100 papers for data extraction. The most frequent interventions were mid-urethral slings (85 studies), Burch colposuspension (10 studies), and the use of bulking agents (3 studies). The most frequently used instruments for objective evaluation of SUI were urodynamics (90 studies), nonvalidated cough stress test (83 studies), and 1-h pad test (28 studies). The most frequently used instruments for subjective evaluation were bladder diary (37 studies), Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-7 (26 studies), and Urinary Distress Inventory-6 (23 studies). There were three studies reporting results according to the severity of pre- and post-operative SUI.

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant heterogeneity regarding the instruments used to evaluate the severity of SUI in surgical trials for female incontinence. There is a paucity of data regarding results according to the pre-operative severity of SUI. Hence, commonly agreed standardized methods for the assessment of SUI severity are needed to improve comparability between clinical trials for SUI surgery.

Autologous Slings in Female Stress Urinary Incontinence Treatment: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of autologous fascial slings (AFS) compared with other surgical methods for female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) treatment.

METHODS

The search was performed on studies published before September 2023 to identify articles assessing the effectiveness and safety of AFS compared with other surgical methods in female SUI. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and adult women with SUI. Exclusion criteria were other urinary incontinence types, combined pharmacological treatment, pregnancy, and lactation. This systematic review was conducted according to the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome framework, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 checklist, and was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews.

RESULTS

Twenty RCTs were included in the systematic review and 10 RCTs in the meta-analysis. Comparison between AFS and synthetic midurethral slings (SMUS) did not show any statistically significant differences in the cure rate, frequency of urinary retention, or self-catheterization. SMUS showed more long-term postoperative complications (RR = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.50, p = 0.004), AFS had more in de novo urgency cases: (RR = 2.84, 95% CI: 1.13 to 7.10, p = 0.03). Operation time of SMUS was lower: (RR = 2.87, 95% CI: 2.56 to 3.19, p < 0.00001, I2 = 97%). SMUS showed significantly lower hospital stay duration: (RR = 1.92, 95% CI: 1.44 to 2.41, p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, autologous slings demonstrated the same efficacy in comparison with SMUS in the management of SUI in women. AFS showed lower incidence of long-term postoperative complications. SMUS demonstrated lower operation time, hospital stay and de novo urgency.

Single-incision sling operations for urinary incontinence in women

BACKGROUND

Stress urinary incontinence imposes a significant health and economic burden on individuals and society. Single-incision slings are a minimally-invasive treatment option for stress urinary incontinence. They involve passing a short synthetic device through the anterior vaginal wall to support the mid-urethra. The use of polypropylene mesh in urogynaecology, including mid-urethral slings, is restricted in many countries. This is a review update (previous search date 2012).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of single-incision sling operations for treating urinary incontinence in women, and to summarise the principal findings of relevant economic evaluations.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, and two trials registers. We handsearched journals, conference proceedings, and reference lists of relevant articles to 20 September 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in women with stress (or stress-predominant mixed) urinary incontinence in which at least one, but not all, trial arms included a single-incision sling.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. The primary outcome was subjective cure or improvement of urinary incontinence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 62 studies with a total of 8051 women in this review. We did not identify any studies comparing single-incision slings to no treatment, conservative treatment, colposuspension, or laparoscopic procedures. We assessed most studies as being at low or unclear risk of bias, with five studies at high risk of bias for outcome assessment. Sixteen trials used TVT-Secur, a single-incision sling withdrawn from the market in 2013. The primary analysis in this review excludes trials using TVT-Secur. We report separate analyses for these trials, which did not substantially alter the effect estimates. We identified two cost-effectiveness analyses and one cost-minimisation analysis. Single-incision sling versus autologous fascial sling One study (70 women) compared single-incision slings to autologous fascial slings. It is uncertain if single-incision slings have any effect on risk of dyspareunia (painful sex) or mesh exposure, extrusion or erosion compared with autologous fascial slings. Subjective cure or improvement of urinary incontinence at 12 months, patient-reported pain at 24 months or longer, number of women with urinary retention, quality of life at 12 months and the number of women requiring repeat continence surgery or sling revision were not reported for this comparison. Single-incision sling versus retropubic sling Ten studies compared single-incision slings to retropubic slings. There may be little to no difference between single-incision slings and retropubic slings in subjective cure or improvement of incontinence at 12 months (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91 to 1.07; 2 trials, 297 women; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether single-incision slings increase the risk of mesh exposure, extrusion or erosion compared with retropubic minimally-invasive slings; the wide confidence interval is consistent with both benefit and harm (RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.24 to 9.82; 3 trials, 267 women; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether single-incision slings lead to fewer women having postoperative urinary retention compared with retropubic slings; the wide confidence interval is consistent with possible benefit and harm (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.84; 2 trials, 209 women; low-certainty evidence). The effect of single-incision slings on the risk of repeat continence surgery or mesh revision compared with retropubic slings is uncertain (RR 4.19, 95% CI 0.31 to 57.28; 2 trials, 182 women; very low-certainty evidence). One study reported quality of life, but not in a suitable format for analysis. Patient-reported pain at more than 24 months and the number of women with dyspareunia were not reported for this comparison. We downgraded the evidence due to concerns about risks of bias, imprecision and inconsistency. Single-incision sling versus transobturator sling Fifty-one studies compared single-incision slings to transobturator slings. The evidence ranged from high to low certainty. There is no evidence of a difference in subjective cure or improvement of incontinence at 12 months when comparing single-incision slings with transobturator slings (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.03; 17 trials, 2359 women; high-certainty evidence). Single-incision slings probably have a reduced risk of patient-reported pain at 24 months post-surgery compared with transobturator slings (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.68; 2 trials, 250 women; moderate-certainty evidence). The effect of single-incision slings on the risk of dyspareunia is uncertain compared with transobturator slings, as the wide confidence interval is consistent with possible benefit and possible harm (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.48; 8 trials, 810 women; moderate-certainty evidence). There are a similar number of mesh exposures, extrusions or erosions with single-incision slings compared with transobturator slings (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.96; 16 trials, 2378 women; high-certainty evidence). Single-incision slings probably result in similar or reduced cases of postoperative urinary retention compared with transobturator slings (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.97; 23 trials, 2891 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Women with single-incision slings may have lower quality of life at 12 months compared to transobturator slings (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.24, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.39; 8 trials, 698 women; low-certainty evidence). It is unclear whether single-incision slings lead to slightly more women requiring repeat continence surgery or mesh revision compared with transobturator slings (95% CI consistent with possible benefit and harm; RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.16; 13 trials, 1460 women; low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the evidence due to indirectness, imprecision and risks of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Single-incision sling operations have been extensively researched in randomised controlled trials. They may be as effective as retropubic slings and are as effective as transobturator slings for subjective cure or improvement of stress urinary incontinence at 12 months. It is uncertain if single-incision slings lead to better or worse rates of subjective cure or improvement compared with autologous fascial slings. There are still uncertainties regarding adverse events and longer-term outcomes. Therefore, longer-term data are needed to clarify the safety and long-term effectiveness of single-incision slings compared to other mid-urethral slings.

Preliminary report of post-Ophira mini sling implantation voiding pattern: What to learn from pressure-flow studies?

Background:

The study is amined to correlate the voiding pattern after successful mini sling Ophira implantation with postoperative symptoms and satisfaction, in addition to identifying obstructions.

Materials and methods:

From 2012 to 2015 in a single institution, all consecutive patients who had stress urinary incontinence treated by using the mini sling Ophira had a pre- and 12 months postoperative urodynamic test. The International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire – Urinary Incontinence – Short Form (ICIQ-UI-SF) and the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire – Overactive Bladder (ICIQ-OAB) translated into Portuguese, were given. Patients were objectively considered cured when presenting no urinary incontinence at the Valsalva test and subjectively cured when the ICIQ-UI-SF was zero.

Results:

Questionnaire scores were obtained from 29 patients and urodynamic data from 20 patients. Mini sling Ophira implantation resulted in a significant improvement of urinary symptoms evidenced by a significant mean reduction in ICIQ-UI-SF from 16 to 5 (p < 0.0001) and ICIQ-OAB from 8 to 4 (p = 0.0001). The subjective and objective cure rates were 55% and 45%, respectively. The urodynamic changes were not related to success even when adjusted for age, hormonal status, or anterior pelvic organ prolapse. The mean maximum flow decreased to 4.9 mL/s (95% CI: 0.62–10.8; p = 0.035), and the mean detrusor pressure at maximum flow increased to 11.4 cmH₂O (95% CI: 4–18; p = 0.0078).

Conclusions:

Mini sling Ophira implantation decreased maximum urinary flow and increased the detrusor pressure at the maximum urinary flow and these urodynamic changes were not related to success.

Risk Factor of De Novo Urgency and Urge Incontinence After Autologous Fascia Pubovaginal Sling

Introduction

Pubovaginal sling is an efficient and safe procedure for stress urinary incontinence without the complications of synthetic sling. Urine retention and de novo urgency are bothersome aftermath of this procedure. We aim to identify potential risk factors for de novo urgency after autologous pubovaginal sling.

Methods

From 2013 to 2016, 347 patients underwent autologous pubovaginal sling. Age, BMI, pelvic irradiation, use of anticholinergic medication, previous vaginal related surgical histories, “over-tight” technique, and concomitant surgeries were examined for potential risk factors. De novo urgency/urge incontinence was defined as treatment (medication, botulinum toxin injection, sacral neuromodulation) for urge postoperatively and was not noted before surgery. Chi-square and fisher’s exact tests were used as statistical analysis.

Results

A total of 109 patients underwent autologous rectus fascia pubovaginal sling, after excluding status post urethral diverticulectomy, concomitant diverticulectomy, and concomitant abdominal surgery. Twenty-three (21.1%) patients were treated for de novo urge/urge incontinence, 18 (78.2%) with anticholinergic, 4 (17.3%) with botox injection and 2 (8.69%) with sacral neuromodulation. None but prior pelvic organ prolapse surgery was associated with developing de novo urge/urge incontinence (p=0.026).

Discussion

Patients with prior pelvic organ prolapse surgery were more likely to be at risk of de novo urgency after autologous pubovaginal sling. This study provided more information for preoperative consultation for patients undergoing incontinence surgery.

Surgical treatments for women with stress urinary incontinence: the ESTER systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Urinary incontinence in women is a distressing condition that restricts quality of life and results in a large economic burden to both the NHS and women themselves.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of surgical treatment for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in women and explore women's preferences.

DESIGN

An evidence synthesis, a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and an economic decision model, with a value-of-information (VOI) analysis. Nine surgical interventions were compared. Previous Cochrane reviews for each were identified and updated to include additional studies. Systematic review methods were applied. The outcomes of interest were 'cure' and 'improvement'. Both a pairwise and a network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted for all available surgical comparisons. A DCE was undertaken to assess the preferences of women for treatment outcomes. An economic model assessed the cost-effectiveness of alternative surgeries and a VOI analysis was undertaken.

RESULTS

Data from 175 studies were included in the effectiveness review. The majority of included studies were rated as being at high or unclear risk of bias across all risk-of-bias domains. The NMA, which included 120 studies that reported data on 'cure' or 'improvement', showed that retropubic mid-urethral sling (MUS), transobturator MUS, traditional sling and open colposuspension were more effective than other surgical procedures for both primary outcomes. The results for other interventions were variable. In general, rate of tape and mesh exposure was higher after transobturator MUS than after retropubic MUS or single-incision sling, whereas the rate of tape or mesh erosion/extrusion was similar between transobturator MUS and retropubic MUS. The results of the DCE, in which 789 women completed an anonymous online questionnaire, indicate that women tend to prefer surgical treatments associated with no pain or mild chronic pain and shorter length of hospital stay as well as those treatments that have a smaller risk for urinary symptoms to reoccur after surgery. The cost-effectiveness results suggest that, over a lifetime, retropubic MUS is, on average, the least costly and most effective surgery. However, the high level of uncertainty makes robust estimates difficult to ascertain. The VOI analysis highlighted that further research around the incidence rates of complications would be of most value.

LIMITATIONS

Overall, the quality of the clinical evidence was low, with limited data available for the assessment of complications. Furthermore, there is a lack of robust evidence and significant uncertainty around some parameters in the economic modelling.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the most comprehensive assessment of published evidence for the treatment of SUI. There is some evidence that retropubic MUS, transobturator MUS and traditional sling are effective in the short to medium term and that retropubic MUS is cost-effective in the medium to long term. The VOI analysis highlights the value of further research to reduce the uncertainty around the incidence rates of complications. There is a need to obtain robust clinical data in future work, particularly around long-term complication rates.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016049339.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Is There Outcome Reporting Heterogeneity in Trials That Aim to Assess the Effectiveness of Surgical Treatments for Stress Urinary Incontinence in Women?

CONTEXT

Inconsistent reporting of effectiveness outcomes in surgical trials of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) has hindered direct comparisons of various surgical treatments for SUI.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the verbatim outcome names, outcome definitions, and tools used to measure the outcomes in surgical trials of SUI in women.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Trials of women with SUI who have undergone surgical interventions were included. We conducted a systematic review (SR) on outcomes reported in randomized controlled trials of surgical management published in 2014-2019, covering the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CDSR. Verbatim outcome names extracted from the included studies were categorized and then grouped into domains using the Williamson-Clarke (W/C) outcome taxonomy. A matrix was also created to visualize and quantify the dimensions of outcome reporting heterogeneity in SUI trials.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 844 verbatim outcome names were extracted, of which, 514 varied terms were reduced to 71 standardized outcome names. They were further categorized into 11 domains from the W/C taxonomy. There were 7.24 different terms on average to describe each outcome, and the four outcomes with the most heterogeneity evident in terms used to describe them were "urinary retention", "reoperation", "subjective cure rate" and "quality of life". Each of them had ≥20 different terms. Only 28% of the outcome definitions were reported and a variety of measuring tools was noted, particularly in subjective outcomes. High heterogeneity was found in the outcome names, outcome definitions, choice and number of measuring instruments of the outcomes, and choice and number of outcomes reported across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This SR provides objective evidence of heterogeneity in outcome reporting in SUI surgical trials. Our categorization of outcomes highlights the difficulties in summarizing the current evidence base. A core outcome set, developed using the methods advocated by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) and COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) initiatives, is required.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this research, we have highlighted the diversity in outcomes reporting in stress urinary incontinence (SUI) surgical trials and have categorized the outcomes. We support the development of a core outcome set for SUI, which will promote future clinical researchers to measure the same outcome in the same way in all trials. This will, in turn, help researchers summarize the evidence more effectively and aid decision making for patients and doctors.

Traditional suburethral sling operations for urinary incontinence in women

BACKGROUND

Stress urinary incontinence constitutes a significant health and economic burden to society. Traditional suburethral slings are surgical operations used to treat women with symptoms of stress urinary incontinence.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of traditional suburethral sling procedures for treating stress urinary incontinence in women; and summarise the principal findings of relevant economic evaluations.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), as well as MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP); we handsearched journals and conference proceedings (searched 27 February 2017) and the reference lists of relevant articles. On 23 January 2019, we updated this search; as a result, several additional reports of studies are awaiting classification.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised trials that assessed traditional suburethral slings for treating stress or mixed urinary incontinence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently extracted data from included trials and assessed risk of bias. When appropriate, a summary statistic was calculated: risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data, odds ratio (OR) for continence and cure rates that were expected to be high, and mean difference (MD) for continuous data. We adopted the GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 34 trials involving 3244 women were included. Traditional slings were compared with 10 other treatments and with each other. We did not identify any trials comparing suburethral slings with no treatment or sham treatment, conservative management, anterior repair, or laparoscopic retropubic colposuspension. Most trials did not distinguish between women having surgery for primary or recurrent incontinence. One trial compared traditional slings with bladder neck needle suspension, and another trial compared traditional slings with single-incision slings. Both trials were too small to be informative. Traditional suburethral sling operation versus drugs One small trial compared traditional suburethral sling operations with oxybutynin to treat women with mixed urinary incontinence. This trial did not report any of our GRADE-specific outcomes. It is uncertain whether surgery compared with oxybutynin leads to more women being dry (83% vs 0%; OR 195.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.91 to 3871.03) or having less urgency urinary incontinence (13% vs 43%; RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.94) because the quality of this evidence is very low. Traditional suburethral sling versus injectables One small trial compared traditional slings with suburethral injectable treatment. The impact of surgery versus injectables is uncertain in terms of the number of continent women (100% were dry with a traditional sling versus 71% with the injectable after the first year; OR 11.57, 95% CI 0.56 to 239.74), the need for repeat surgery for urinary incontinence (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.36) or the occurrence of perioperative complications (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.29 to 8.49), as the quality of evidence is very low. Traditional suburethral sling versus open abdominal retropubic colposuspension Eight trials compared slings with open abdominal retropubic colposuspension. Moderate-quality evidence shows that the traditional suburethral sling probably leads to more continent women in the medium term (one to five years) (69% vs 59% after colposuspension: OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.37). High-quality evidence shows that women were less likely to need repeat continence surgery after a traditional sling operation than after colposuspension (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.42). We found no evidence of a difference in perioperative complications between the two groups, but the CI was very wide and the quality of evidence was very low (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.86). Traditional suburethral sling operation versus mid-urethral slings Fourteen trials compared traditional sling operations and mid-urethral sling operations. Depending on judgements about what constitutes a clinically important difference between interventions with regard to continence, traditional suburethral slings are probably no better, and may be less effective, than mid-urethral slings in terms of number of women continent in the medium term (one to five years) (67% vs 74%; OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.02; n = 458; moderate-quality evidence). One trial reported more continent women with the traditional sling after 10 years (51% vs 32%: OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.07 to 4.61). Mid-urethral slings may be associated with fewer perioperative complications (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.60; low-quality evidence). One type of traditional sling operation versus another type of traditional sling operation Nine trials compared one type of traditional sling operation with another. The different types of traditional slings, along with the number of different materials used, mean that trial results could not be pooled due to clinical heterogeneity. Complications were reported by two trials - one comparing non-absorbable Goretex with a rectus fascia sling, and the second comparing Pelvicol with a rectus fascial sling. The impact was uncertain due to the very low quality of evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-quality evidence suggests that women may be more likely to be continent in the medium term (one to five years) after a traditional suburethral sling operation than after colposuspension. It is very uncertain whether there is a difference in urinary incontinence after a traditional suburethral sling compared with a mid-urethral sling in the medium term. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution, as long-term follow-up data were not available from most trials. Long-term follow-up of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing traditional slings with colposuspension and mid-urethral slings is essential. Evidence is insufficient to suggest whether traditional suburethral slings may be better or worse than other management techniques. This review is confined to RCTs and therefore may not identify all of the adverse effects that may be associated with these procedures. A brief economic commentary (BEC) identified three eligible economic evaluations, which are not directly comparable due to differences in methods, time horizons, and settings. End users of this review will need to assess the extent to which methods and results of identified economic evaluations may be applicable (or transferable) to their own setting.

Surgery for Stress Urinary Incontinence: Autologous Fascial Sling

This article describes the operative technique of autologous fascial pubovaginal sling (AFPVS) surgery, examines the senior author's outcomes with AFPVS, compares these outcomes with those of other large studies and meta-analyses, and compares the safety and efficacy of AFPVS with those of the synthetic midurethral sling (SMUS). Recently, the SMUS has become the treatment of choice for most surgeons. The efficacy of the SMUS remains unchallenged and comparable with that of AFPVS, but SMUS are associated with more severe complications. In the author's opinion, the AFPVS should remain the gold standard for treating SUI.