Imaging findings of vinyl dimethyl polydimethylsiloxane used as a paraurethral injectable for female stress urinary incontinence

Contains fulltext : 241948.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access

Application of amniotic membranes in reconstructive surgery of internal organs-A systematic review and meta-analysis

Amniotic membrane (AM) has great potential as a scaffold for tissue regeneration in reconstructive surgery. To date, no systematic review of the literature has been performed for the applications of AM in wound closure of internal organs. Therefore, in this systematic review and meta-analysis, we summarize the literature on the safety and efficacy of AM for the closure of internal organs. A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE-PubMed database and OVID Embase to retrieve human and controlled animal studies on wound closure of internal organs. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized clinical trials and the SYRCLE risk of bias tool for animal studies were used. Meta-analyses (MAs) were conducted for controlled animal studies to assess efficacy of closure, mortality and complications in subjects who underwent surgical wound closure in internal organs with the application of AM. Sixty references containing 26 human experiments and 36 animal experiments were included. The MAs of the controlled animal studies showed comparable results with regard to closure, mortality and complications, and suggested improved mechanical strength and lower inflammation scores after AM application when compared to standard surgical closure techniques. This systematic review and MAs demonstrate that the application of AM to promote wound healing of internal organs appears to be safe, efficacious, and feasible

Cost-effectiveness of urethral bulking polydimethylsiloxane-Urolastic® compared with mid-urethral sling surgery for stress urinary incontinence: A two-arm cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of urethral bulking polydimethylsiloxane-Urolastic® (PDMS-U) compared with mid-urethral sling (MUS) surgery for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) at 1-year follow-up. DESIGN: Prospective, two-arm cohort study with 2-year follow-up. SETTING: International multicentre. POPULATION: Women with moderate to severe SUI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was subjective cure (Patient Global Impression of Improvement). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: objective cure (negative cough stress test), Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI-6), complications and re-interventions. Cost-effectiveness outcomes: total costs, quality-adjusted life year (QALY) using IIQ7-scores (Incontinence Impact Questionnaire) and EQ-5D-5L, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and monetary benefit (adjusted for baseline confounders). RESULTS: In all, 131 PDMS-U and 153 MUS surgery patients were treated. Subjective cure rates for MUS surgery and PDMS-U were, respectively: 101/112 (90%) versus 40/87 (46%), adjusted odds ratio (aOR; for age, body mass index [BMI], severity, type of urinary incontinence and previous SUI procedure) was 4.9. Objective cure rates for MUS surgery and PDMS-U were respectively: 98/109 (90%) versus 58/92 (63%), aOR 5.4. Average total costs for PDMS-U and MUS surgery were €3567 and €6688. ICER for MUS surgery cost €15 598 per IIQ QALY and €37 408 per EQ-5D-5L QALY. With a willingness to pay (WTP) of €25 000, MUS has a 84% chance of being cost-effective using IIQ, whereas PDMS-U has a 99% chance of being cost-effective using EQ-5D-5L. CONCLUSION: MUS surgery is more cost-effective in realising improved disease-specific quality of life (QoL), while PDMS-U is more cost-effective in realising improved generic QoL

Consensus Statement of the European Urology Association and the European Urogynaecological Association on the Use of Implanted Materials for Treating Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Stress Urinary Incontinence

Item does not contain fulltextCONTEXT: Surgical nonautologous meshes have been used for several decades to repair abdominal wall herniae. Implantable materials have been adopted for the treatment of female and male stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and female pelvic organ prolapse (POP). OBJECTIVE: A consensus review of existing data based on published meta-analyses and reviews. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: This document summarises the deliberations of a consensus group meeting convened by the European Association of Urology (EAU) and the European Urogynecological Association, to explore the current evidence relating to the use of polypropylene (PP) materials used for the treatment of SUI and POP, with reference to the 2016 EAU guidelines (European Association of Urology 2016), the European Commission's SCENIHR report on the use of surgical meshes (SCENIHR 2015), other available high-quality evidence, guidelines, and national recommendations. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Current data suggest that the use of nonautologous durable materials in surgery has well-established benefits but significant risks, which are specific to the condition and location they are used for. Various graft-related complications have been described-such as infection, chronic pain including dyspareunia, exposure in the vagina, shrinkage, erosion into other organs of xenografts, synthetic PP tapes (used in SUI), and meshes (used in POP)-which differ from the complications seen with abdominal herniae. CONCLUSIONS: When considering surgery for SUI, it is essential to evaluate the available options, which may include synthetic midurethral slings (MUSs) using PP tapes, bulking agents, colposuspension, and autologous sling surgery. The use of synthetic MUSs for surgical treatment of SUI in both male and female patients has good efficacy and acceptable morbidity. Synthetic mesh for POP should be used only in complex cases with recurrent prolapse in the same compartment and restricted to those surgeons with appropriate training who are working in multidisciplinary referral centres. PATIENT SUMMARY: Synthetic slings can be safely used in the surgical treatment of stress incontinence in both male and female patients. Patients need to be aware of the alternative therapy and potential risks and complications of this therapy. Synthetic mesh for treating prolapse should be used only in complex cases with recurrent prolapse in specialist referral centres