International Neurourology Journal

Korean Continence Society (대한배뇨장애요실금학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Efficacy and Safety of Incontinence Surgery According to the Surgeon's Specialty and Performance of a Preoperative Urodynamic Study

  • Choi, Jin Bong (Department of Urology, Bucheon St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Han, Kyung-Do (Department of Biostatistics, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Ha, U-Syn (Department of Urology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Hong, Sung-Hoo (Department of Urology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea)
  • Received : 2018.05.02
  • Accepted : 2018.06.21
  • Published : 2018.12.31
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to analyze the efficacy and to estimate the complication rate of incontinence surgery according to the surgeon's specialty and whether a preoperative urodynamic study (UDS) was performed, using a nationally representative dataset. Methods: We enrolled 356,155 women over 20 years old who had undergone surgery for stress urinary incontinence between 2006 and 2015. Patients were followed for up to 3 years to analyze the reoperation and complication rates. Data were obtained from the National Health Claims Database of the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) of Korea. Multiple Cox regression analysis was conducted to examine the efficacy and safety of incontinence surgery according to the surgeon's specialty and whether a preoperative UDS was performed. Results: The hazard ratio (HR) for reoperation was significantly higher for procedures performed by nonurologists than for procedures performed by urologists (HR, 1.174; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.103-1.249). Acute urinary retention, postoperative infections, procedure-associated pain, and other complications were also more common in procedures performed by nonurologists than in those performed by urologists. When stratified by whether a preoperative UDS was performed, the HR for reoperation according to the surgeon's specialty varied by performance of a preoperative UDS. While the reoperation rate was significantly higher in procedures performed by non-urologists when a preoperative UDS was performed (HR, 1.208; 95% CI, 1.122-1.3), there was no significant difference in the HRs for reoperation according to specialty when a preoperative UDS was not performed. Conclusions: This population-based study showed that the postoperative outcomes of incontinence surgery were dependent upon the surgeon's specialty and that the reoperation rate according to the surgeon's specialty varied based on whether a preoperative UDS was performed.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : Korean Urological Association

References

  1. Haylen BT, de Ridder D, Freeman RM, Swift SE, Berghmans B, Lee J, et al. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction. Neurourol Urodyn 2010;29:4-20.
  2. Choi JB, Yoon BI, Han KD, Hong SH, Ha US. Urinary incontinence is associated with the development of peptic ulcers in adult women: Data from the KNHANES IV. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017;96:e8266. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000008266
  3. Hu TW, Wagner TH, Bentkover JD, Leblanc K, Zhou SZ, Hunt T. Costs of urinary incontinence and overactive bladder in the United States: a comparative study. Urology 2004;63:461-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2003.10.037
  4. Opara J, Czerwinska-Opara WE. The prevalence of stress urinary incontinence in women studying nursing and related quality of life. Prz Menopauzalny 2014;13:32-5.
  5. Reynolds WS, Dmochowski RR, Penson DF. Epidemiology of stress urinary incontinence in women. Curr Urol Rep 2011;12:370-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-011-0206-0
  6. Choi H, Palmer MH, Park J. Meta-analysis of pelvic floor muscle training: randomized controlled trials in incontinent women. Nurs Res 2007;56:226-34. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NNR.0000280610.93373.e1
  7. Ulger Z, Cankurtaran M, Aryogul S. Weight loss for urinary incontinence in overweight and obese women. N Engl J Med 2009;360:2256-7. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc090431
  8. Malallah MA, Al-Shaiji TF. Pharmacological treatment of pure stress urinary incontinence: a narrative review. Int Urogynecol J 2015;26:477-85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2512-9
  9. Wu JM, Gandhi MP, Shah AD, Shah JY, Fulton RG, Weidner AC. Trends in inpatient urinary incontinence surgery in the USA, 1998-2007. Int Urogynecol J 2011;22:1437-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-011-1509-x
  10. Cho SY, Jeong SJ, Yeo JK, Kim SO, Jeong J, Choi JB, et al. Nationwide database of surgical treatment pattern for patients with stress urinary incontinence in Korea. Int Neurourol J 2014;18:91-4. https://doi.org/10.5213/inj.2014.18.2.91
  11. Kim JW, Moon du G, Shin JH, Bae JH, Lee JG, Oh MM. Predictors of voiding dysfunction after mid-urethral sling surgery for stress urinary incontinence. Int Neurourol J 2012;16:30-6. https://doi.org/10.5213/inj.2012.16.1.30
  12. Choi JB, Lee EJ, Han KD, Hong SH, Ha US. Estimating the impact of body mass index on bladder cancer risk: Stratification by smoking status. Sci Rep 2018;8:947. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-19531-7
  13. James MB, Theofanides MC, Sui W, Onyeji I, Badalato GM, Chung DE. Sling procedures for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence: comparison of national practice patterns between urologists and gynecologists. J Urol 2017;198:1386-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.06.093
  14. Wu MP, Huang KH, Long CY, Huang KF, Yu KJ, Tang CH. The distribution of different surgical types for female stress urinary incontinence among patients' age, surgeons' specialties and hospital accreditations in Taiwan: a descriptive 10-year nationwide study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2008;19:1639-46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-008-0697-5
  15. Anger JT, Litwin MS, Wang Q, Pashos CL, Rodriguez LV. Variations in stress incontinence and prolapse management by surgeon specialty. J Urol 2007;178(4 Pt 1):1411-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.05.149
  16. Slopnick EA, Hijaz AK, Nguyen CT, Abouassaly R, Gonzalez CM, Mahajan ST, et al. National surgical trends and perioperative outcomes of midurethral sling placement for stress urinary incontinence. Urology 2017;99:57-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2016.07.027
  17. Elliott CS, Sokol ER. Might pelvic surgeons be unaware of their surgical failures? Patient reporting and perceptions after failed incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 2015;21:298-300. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000187
  18. Spelzini F, Frigerio M, Regini C, Palmieri S, Manodoro S, Milani R. Learning curve for the single-incision suburethral sling procedure for female stress urinary incontinence. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2017;139:363-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12317
  19. Hilton P, Bryant A, Howel D, McColl E, Buckley BS, Lucas M, et al. Assessing professional equipoise and views about a future clinical trial of invasive urodynamics prior to surgery for stress urinary incontinence in women: a survey within a mixed methods feasibility study. Neurourol Urodyn 2012;31:1223-30. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.22328
  20. Nager CW, Brubaker L, Litman HJ, Zyczynski HM, Varner RE, Amundsen C, et al. A randomized trial of urodynamic testing before stress-incontinence surgery. N Engl J Med 2012;366:1987-97. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1113595
  21. van Leijsen SA, Kluivers KB, Mol BW, Broekhuis SR, Milani AL, Bongers MY, et al. Can preoperative urodynamic investigation be omitted in women with stress urinary incontinence? A non-inferiority randomized controlled trial. Neurourol Urodyn 2012;31:1118-23. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.22230
  22. Linder BJ, Trabuco EC, Gebhart JB, Klingele CJ, Occhino JA, Elliott DS, et al. Can urodynamic parameters predict sling revision for voiding dysfunction in women undergoing synthetic midurethral sling placement? Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 2017 Nov 13 [Epub]. https://doi.org/10.1097/SPV.0000000000000521.
  23. Sirls LT, Richter HE, Litman HJ, Kenton K, Lemack GE, Lukacz ES, et al. The effect of urodynamic testing on clinical diagnosis, treatment plan and outcomes in women undergoing stress urinary incontinence surgery. J Urol 2013;189:204-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.09.050
  24. Houwert RM, Venema PL, Aquarius AE, Bruinse HW, Roovers JP, Vervest HA. Risk factors for failure of retropubic and transobturator midurethral slings. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;201:202.e1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2009.04.009
  25. Lee JK, Dwyer PL, Rosamilia A, Lim YN, Polyakov A, Stav K. Persistence of urgency and urge urinary incontinence in women with mixed urinary symptoms after midurethral slings: a multivariate analysis. BJOG 2011;118:798-805. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.02915.x

Cited by

  1. Recent Trends in Transurethral Surgeries and Urological Outpatient Procedures: a Nationwide Population-based Cohort Study vol.35, pp.38, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e315
  2. Second-Line Surgical Management After Midurethral Sling Failure vol.25, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5213/inj.2040278.139