440 likes | 626 Views
Biologic Slings Indications & Techniques in 2012. Jerry G. Blaivas Clinical Professor of Urology Joan & Sanford Weil Medcial School Cornell University Adjunct Professor of Urology SUNY Downstate Medical School. Or,. Do you really still do biologic slings? If so, why? When? With what ?
E N D
Biologic SlingsIndications & Techniques in 2012 Jerry G. BlaivasClinical Professor of Urology Joan & Sanford Weil Medcial School Cornell University Adjunct Professor of UrologySUNY Downstate Medical School
Or, Do you really still do biologic slings?If so, why? When? With what ? And how?
Zenograft • porcine SIS • porcine dermis • bovine pericardium • Autograft • rectus fascia • fascia lata • Allograft • Fascia lata • Dermis • Dura mater
Balloon Incision
Push up withindex finger onvaginalwall Traction ofclamp
Left index finger pushing up on vaginal wall Shiny white surface superficialto pubo-cervical fascia
Incorrect (deep) plane Correct (superficial) plane
Correct (superficial) plane Pubo-cervical fascia Incorrect (deep) plane
Inferior edge of rectus Separate Fascial incision Separate stabwound for sling
Sutures through separate stabwounds in rectus fascia Ends of sling thru fascia
How much tension? • None (create a backboard) • (Almost) can’t make it too loose • Make sure Q-tip is not negative(elevation of vesical neck)
Take slack out ofsling Push down on cystoscope parallel to thefloor
URINARY INCONTINENCE OUTCOME SCORE • Groutz & Blaivas, Neurourol & Urodyn 19:127, 2000
PVS for Simple SUI OUTCOME SCORE 100% 0%
Mixed Incontinence • Cure/Improved Rates (UIOS <= 4) : • SUI: 97% (n= 44) • MUI: 93% (n= 47)non-significant difference (p: 0.33), with study powered a priori to detect > 20% difference in outcome score Chou et al, J Urol, 2003
Autologous Sling Outcomes • Cure/Improve rate - 82% at 4 years • Urinary Retention requiring intervention - 8% • De Novo OAB - 9% Dmochowski, AUA Guidelines on the Surgical Management of SUI, 2010
Insert leach data • Complications from zenografts
Conclusions • Pubovaginal sling effective for: • Urethral hypermobility • Intrinsic sphincter deficiency • Mixed incontinence • Long lasting results • Minimal morbidity
Autologous Fascia vs Synthetics: • Pros: • well documented long term success • no erosions • rare adjacent organ injury, serious complications, refractory pain • Cons • Greater short term morbidity: urethral obstruction, wound inf, hernia, etc • Longer learning curve for surgeon
The Gold Standard: AFPVS • AFPVS has (almost) no life-style altering complications: • intractable pain • erosions • vaginal extrusions • There are 2 absolute indications: • recurrent sphincteric incontinence after urethral erosion of synthetic sling • concomitant sling & urethral diverticulectomy
The Gold Standard: AFPVS • Strong indication – whenever bladder neck sling is needed • “pipe-stem urethra” • no urethral mobility • So, AFPVS or mid-urethral synthetic sling? • You decide!