Outcomes of Transabdominal and Transvaginal Bladder Neck Closure

Mosli-Lynch C1, Trimboli M1, Toia B1, Pakzad M H1, Hamid R1, Ockrim J L1, Greenwell T J1

Research Type

Clinical

Abstract Category

Female Stress Urinary Incontinence (SUI)

Abstract 385
Open Discussion ePosters
Scientific Open Discussion Session 21
Thursday 30th August 2018
13:10 - 13:15 (ePoster Station 8)
Exhibition Hall
Incontinence Surgery Retrospective Study
1. University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
Presenter
R

Rizwan Hamid

Links

Poster

Abstract

Hypothesis / aims of study
Bladder Neck Closure (BNC) is a rarely performed procedure for intractable urinary incontinence. Two main approaches, transabdominal and transvaginal, are described. In this paper, we assess the outcomes of these two different techniques.
Study design, materials and methods
We reviewed the outcomes of 25 consecutive patients who had BNC performed in one unit for intractable urinary incontinence. Data assessed were patient demographics, underlying diagnosis, technique of BNC, the use and type of tissue interposition and whether concurrent bladder augmentation or urinary diversion was performed. Statistical analysis was by Chi Squared Test and significance determined as P < 0.05.
Results
Results are shown on table 1. 18 Patients had bladder neck closure via a transabdominal approach, and 7 had a vaginal one with a success rate of 83% and 71% respectively at first attempt. In total 4 patients had revision surgery and they were all successful.
Interpretation of results
From our results we can see how the use of tissue interposition correlated with a successful outcome in 91% of patients at first surgical attempt.  When a previous history of radiotherapy treatment was present the success rate fell at 33%. Results are shown in Table 1.
Concluding message
Bladder neck closure is a valid surgical option in patients with intractable urinary incontinence. History of radiotherapy and lack of tissue interposition were significantly associated with failure of BNC whilst route of repair did not.
Figure 1
Disclosures
Funding Not applicable Clinical Trial No Subjects Human Ethics not Req'd Retrospective study Helsinki Yes Informed Consent No
23/04/2024 18:41:25