Randomized Trial of Single-Incision Midurethral Sling And Laparoscopic Burch Colposuspension: Postoperative Surgical Outcomes and Complications

Study Objective Various retropubic and midurethral sling techniques have shown high cure rates in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The aim of this study was to compare single-incision midurethral sling (SIMS), and laparoscopic Burch colposuspension (LBC) procedures in patients with SUI in terms of the effectiveness, patient satisfaction, surgical complications and results. Design This is a prospective randomised study. Setting A university tertiary hospital Patients Forty patients with clinically and/or urodynamically proven SUI who agreed to surgical treatment were randomized to the SIMS and LBC groups and included in the study. Interventions Patients were treated with SIMS and LBC operations. Measurements and Main Results Demographic characteristics of patients, physical and pelvic examination, preoperative and postoperative clinical findings, Kings Health Questionnaire (KHQ) form, Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and Prolapse Quality of Life Questionnaire (P-QoL) form, postoperative Day 1 Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, and postoperative complications were recorded. Objective and subjective success rates were recorded by re-evaluating the patients in the first and sixth months of the operation. Objective success was defined as having a negative stress test and subjective success was defined as the absence of stress-induced urine leakage after surgery in a validated questionnaire. The primary result of our study was considered to be objective success, while the secondary result was subjective success and life quality tests. Twenty patients each in the SIMS group and the LBC group were included in the study. No significant difference was found in objective success (90% vs. 85%, p=0.633) or subjective success (85% vs. 75%, p=0.695) between the two groups at 6-month follow-up. A significant improvement in life quality was observed in the postoperative period for both groups; however, the difference between the groups was not significant. There was an improvement in sexual function in both groups. Nonetheless, while this improvement was significant in the SIMS group, it was not significant in the LBC group. Additionally, surgery time, catheterization time and hospitalization time were shorter in the SIMS group than in the LBC group. The VAS score on postoperative day 1 was lower in the SIMS group. Groups were not different in terms of peroperative and postoperative complications. Conclusion This preliminary study is the first randomized study which compares the LBC and SIMS procedures in the literature. It shows that SIMS and LBC procedures have not different objective and subjective success rates in the short term. It was also observed that they increase both sexual and life quality results in a positive and similar way.