Skip to main content
PMC home page
Medline Book to support NIHPA logoLink to Medline Book to support NIHPA
. 2022 Dec;26(47):1–190. doi: 10.3310/BTSA6148

Single-incision mini-slings versus standard synthetic mid-urethral slings for surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women: The SIMS RCT.

Mohamed Abdel-Fattah, David Cooper, Tracey Davidson, Mary Kilonzo, Dwayne Boyers, Kiron Bhal, Alison McDonald, Judith Wardle, James N'Dow, Graeme MacLennan, John Norrie
PMCID: PMC9761550  PMID: 36520097

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Stress urinary incontinence is the most common type of urinary incontinence in premenopausal women. Until recently, synthetic mid-urethral slings (mesh/tape) were the standard surgical treatment, if conservative management failed. Adjustable anchored single-incision mini-slings are newer, use less mesh and may reduce perioperative morbidity, but it is unclear how their success rates and safety compare with those of standard tension-free mid-urethral slings.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to compare tension-free standard mid-urethral slings with adjustable anchored single-incision mini-slings among women with stress urinary incontinence requiring surgical intervention, in terms of patient-reported effectiveness, health-related quality of life, safety and cost-effectiveness.

DESIGN

This was a pragmatic non-inferiority randomised controlled trial. Allocation was by remote web-based randomisation (1 : 1 ratio).

SETTING

The trial was set in 21 UK hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were women aged ≥ 18 years with predominant stress urinary incontinence, undergoing a mid-urethral sling procedure.

INTERVENTIONS

Single-incision mini-slings, compared with standard mid-urethral slings.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was patient-reported success rates on the Patient Global Impression of Improvement scale at 15 months post randomisation (≈ 1 year post surgery), with success defined as outcomes of 'very much improved' or 'much improved'. The primary economic outcome was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Secondary outcomes were adverse events, impact on other urinary symptoms, quality of life and sexual function.

RESULTS

A total of 600 participants were randomised. At 15 months post randomisation, adjustable anchored single-incision mini-slings were non-inferior to tension-free standard mid-urethral slings at the 10% margin for the primary outcome [single-incision mini-sling 79% (212/268) vs. standard mid-urethral sling 76% (189/250), risk difference 4.6, 95% confidence interval -2.7 to 11.8; pnon-inferiority < 0.001]. Similarly, at 3 years' follow-up, patient-reported success rates in the single-incision mini-sling group were non-inferior to those of the standard mid-urethral sling group at the 10% margin [single-incision mini-sling 72% (177/246) vs. standard mid-urethral sling 67% (157/235), risk difference 5.7, 95% confidence interval -1.3 to 12.8; pnon-inferiority < 0.001]. Tape/mesh exposure rates were higher for single-incision mini-sling participants, with 3.3% (9/276) [compared with 1.9% (5/261) in the standard mid-urethral sling group] reporting tape exposure over the 3 years of follow-up. The rate of groin/thigh pain was slightly higher in the single-incision mini-sling group at 15 months [single-incision mini-sling 15% (41/276) vs. standard mid-urethral sling 12% (31/261), risk difference 3.0%, 95% confidence interval -1.1% to 7.1%]; however, by 3 years, the rate of pain was slightly higher among the standard mid-urethral sling participants [single-incision mini-sling 14% (39/276) vs. standard mid-urethral sling 15% (39/261), risk difference -0.8, 95% confidence interval -4.1 to 2.5]. At the 3-year follow-up, quality of life and sexual function outcomes were similar in both groups: for the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Quality of Life, the mean difference in scores was -1.1 (95% confidence interval -3.1 to 0.8; p = 0.24), and for the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire, International Urogynecological Association-Revised, it was 0 (95% confidence interval -0.1, 0.1; p = 0.92). However, more women in the single-incision mini-sling group reported dyspareunia [12% (17/145), compared with 4.8% (7/145) in the standard mid-urethral sling group, risk difference 7.0%, 95% confidence interval 1.9% to 12.1%]. The base-case economics results showed no difference in costs (-£6, 95% confidence interval -£228 to £208) or quality-adjusted life-years (0.005, 95% confidence interval -0.068 to 0.073) between the groups. There is a 56% probability that single-incision mini-slings will be considered cost-effective at the £20,000 willingness-to-pay threshold value for a quality-adjusted life-year.

LIMITATIONS

Follow-up data beyond 3 years post randomisation are not available to inform longer-term safety and cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-incision mini-slings were non-inferior to standard mid-urethral slings in patient-reported success rates at up to 3 years' follow-up.

FUTURE WORK

Success rates, adverse events, retreatment rates, symptoms, and quality-of-life scores at 10 years' follow-up will help inform long-term effectiveness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered as ISRCTN93264234.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 47. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Plain language summary

Stress urinary incontinence, the involuntary leakage of urine, is a common and distressing condition, particularly for women aged > 40 years. In the UK, it is estimated that 6 million (40%) of this age group have symptoms bothersome enough for doctors to investigate. It causes embarrassment, low self-esteem and even social isolation. Standard surgical treatment used to be a mid-urethral sling made of mesh, inserted, in most cases, under general anaesthetic. Recently, a single-incision mini-sling, using less mesh, has been available under local anaesthetic. A number of small studies have shown that mini-slings have similar success rates to those of standard slings, necessitate shorter hospital stays and are less painful immediately after surgery. However, these results were uncertain and the potential longer-term benefits and disadvantages of both types of sling treatments were unknown. We compared the two types of sling treatments in a randomised trial of 600 women to see if they were equally effective. Success was measured by asking women to report on their symptoms and experiences. We also collected information on safety, quality of life, sexual function, and costs to women and the NHS. Every participant had an equal chance of starting treatment with the standard sling or the mini-sling. Participants were followed up for 3 years. Women allocated to each treatment reported similar success rates, quality of life and sexual function at 3 years. Women who received the new mini-sling had more mesh exposure (3% for the mini-sling vs. 2% for the standard sling) and were more likely to report pain during intercourse (12% vs. 5%) than women who received the standard sling. Both treatments had similar costs. Follow-up to 10 years is under way to establish the long-term benefits and disadvantages.

Full text of this article can be found in Bookshelf.

References

  1. Abdel-Fattah M, MacLennan G, Kilonzo M, Assassa RP, McCormick K, Davidson T, et al. The SIMS trial: adjustable anchored single-incision mini-slings versus standard tension-free midurethral slings in the surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence. A study protocol for a pragmatic, multicentre, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 2017;7:e015111. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015111 doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  2. D’Ancona C, Haylen B, Oelke M, Abranches-Monteiro L, Arnold E, Goldman H, et al. The International Continence Society (ICS) report on the terminology for adult male lower urinary tract and pelvic floor symptoms and dysfunction. Neurourol Urodyn 2019;38:433–77. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23897 doi: 10.1002/nau.23897. [DOI] [PubMed]
  3. Tennstedt SL, Link CL, Steers WD, McKinlay JB. Prevalence of and risk factors for urine leakage in a racially and ethnically diverse population of adults: the Boston Area Community Health (BACH) Survey. Am J Epidemiol 2008;167:390–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwm356 doi: 10.1093/aje/kwm356. [DOI] [PubMed]
  4. Buckley BS, Lapitan MC. Prevalence of urinary and faecal incontinence and nocturnal enuresis and attitudes to treatment and help-seeking among a community-based representative sample of adults in the United Kingdom. Int J Clin Pract 2009;63:568–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2008.01974.x doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2008.01974.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  5. Townsend MK, Curhan GC, Resnick NM, Grodstein F. The incidence of urinary incontinence across Asian, black, and white women in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;202:378.e1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2009.11.021 doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.11.021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  6. Perry S, Shaw C, Assassa P, Dallosso H, Williams K, Brittain KR, et al. An epidemiological study to establish the prevalence of urinary symptoms and felt need in the community: the Leicestershire MRC Incontinence Study. Leicestershire MRC Incontinence Study Team. J Public Health Med 2000;22:427–34. https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/22.3.427 doi: 10.1093/pubmed/22.3.427. [DOI] [PubMed]
  7. Hannestad YS, Rortveit G, Sandvik H, Hunskaar S, Norwegian EPINCONT study. Epidemiology of Incontinence in the County of Nord-Trøndelag. A community-based epidemiological survey of female urinary incontinence: the Norwegian EPINCONT study. Epidemiology of Incontinence in the County of Nord-Trøndelag. J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:1150–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(00)00232-8 doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(00)00232-8. [DOI] [PubMed]
  8. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten U, et al. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn 2002;21:167–78. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.10052 doi: 10.1002/nau.10052. [DOI] [PubMed]
  9. Abrams P, Artibani W, Cardozo L, Dmochowski R, van Kerrebroeck P, Sand P, International Continence Society. Reviewing the ICS 2002 terminology report: the ongoing debate. Neurourol Urodyn 2009;28:287. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20737 doi: 10.1002/nau.20737. [DOI] [PubMed]
  10. 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. Int Urogynecol J 2010;21:5–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-0976-9 doi: 10.1007/s00192-009-0976-9. [DOI] [PubMed]
  11. Lifford KL, Townsend MK, Curhan GC, Resnick NM, Grodstein F. The epidemiology of urinary incontinence in older women: incidence, progression, and remission. J Am Geriatr Soc 2008;56:1191–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.01747.x doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.01747.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  12. Wennberg AL, Molander U, Fall M, Edlund C, Peeker R, Milsom I. A longitudinal population-based survey of urinary incontinence, overactive bladder, and other lower urinary tract symptoms in women. Eur Urol 2009;55:783–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2009.01.007 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.01.007. [DOI] [PubMed]
  13. Herzog AR, Diokno AC, Brown MB, Fultz NH, Goldstein NE. Urinary incontinence as a risk factor for mortality. J Am Geriatr Soc 1994;42:264–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1994.tb01749.x doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1994.tb01749.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  14. Fultz NH, Burgio K, Diokno AC, Kinchen KS, Obenchain R, Bump RC. Burden of stress urinary incontinence for community-dwelling women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;189:1275–82. https://doi.org/10.1067/S0002-9378(03)00598-2 doi: 10.1067/S0002-9378(03)00598-2. [DOI] [PubMed]
  15. Norton PA, MacDonald LD, Sedgwick PM, Stanton SL. Distress and delay associated with urinary incontinence, frequency, and urgency in women. BMJ 1988;297:1187–9. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.297.6657.1187 doi: 10.1136/bmj.297.6657.1187. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  16. Wagg A, Harari D, Husk J, Lowe D, Lourtie J. National Audit of Continence Care: Combined Organisational and Clinical Report. London: Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership; 2010. URL: www.rcplondon.ac.uk/file/911/download (accessed 1 April 2021).
  17. Royal College of Physicians. National Audit of Continence Care (NACC). URL: www.rcplondon.ac.uk/projects/outputs/national-audit-continence-care-nacc (accessed 4 January 2021).
  18. Ko Y, Lin SJ, Salmon JW, Bron MS. The impact of urinary incontinence on quality of life of the elderly. Am J Manag Care 2005;11(Suppl. 4):103–11. [PubMed]
  19. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Urinary Incontinence in Women: Management. Clinical guideline [CG171]. URL: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg171 (accessed 26 January 2021).
  20. Glavind K, Tetsche MS. Sexual function in women before and after suburethral sling operation for stress urinary incontinence: a retrospective questionnaire study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2004;83:965–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0001-6349.2004.00555.x doi: 10.1111/j.0001-6349.2004.00555.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  21. Elzevier HW, Venema PL, Lycklama á Nijeholt AA. Sexual function after tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) for stress incontinence: results of a mailed questionnaire. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2004;15:313–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-004-1149-5 doi: 10.1007/s00192-004-1149-5. [DOI] [PubMed]
  22. Roumeguére T, Quackels T, Bollens R, de Groote A, Zlotta A, Bossche MV, Schulman C. Trans-obturator vaginal tape (TOT) for female stress incontinence: 1 year follow-up in 120 patients. Eur Urol 2005;48:805–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2005.08.003 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.08.003. [DOI] [PubMed]
  23. Brubaker L, Chiang S, Zyczynski H, Norton P, Kalinoski DL, Stoddard A, et al. The impact of stress incontinence surgery on female sexual function. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;200:562.e1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2008.11.017 doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.11.017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  24. Serati M, Salvatore S, Uccella S, Artibani W, Novara G, Cardozo L, et al. Surgical treatment for female stress urinary incontinence: what is the gold-standard procedure? Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2009;20:619–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-0850-9 doi: 10.1007/s00192-009-0850-9. [DOI] [PubMed]
  25. Sentilhes L, Berthier A, Loisel C, Descamps P, Marpeau L, Grise P. Female sexual function following surgery for stress urinary incontinence: tension-free vaginal versus transobturator tape procedure. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2009;20:393–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-008-0778-5 doi: 10.1007/s00192-008-0778-5. [DOI] [PubMed]
  26. Turner DA, Shaw C, McGrother CW, Dallosso HM, Cooper NJ, MRC Incontinence Team. The cost of clinically significant urinary storage symptoms for community dwelling adults in the UK. BJU Int 2004;93:1246–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410x.2004.04806.x doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.2004.04806.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  27. Papanicolaou S, Hunskaar S, Lose G, Sykes D. Assessment of bothersomeness and impact on quality of life of urinary incontinence in women in France, Germany, Spain and the UK. BJU Int 2005;96:831–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05722.x doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05722.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  28. Monz B, Chartier-Kastler E, Hampel C, Samsioe G, Hunskaar S, Espuna-Pons M, et al. Patient characteristics associated with quality of life in European women seeking treatment for urinary incontinence: results from PURE. Eur Urol 2007;51:1073–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.09.022 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.09.022. [DOI] [PubMed]
  29. Feneley RC, Hopley IB, Wells PN. Urinary catheters: history, current status, adverse events and research agenda. J Med Eng Technol 2015;39:459–70. https://doi.org/10.3109/03091902.2015.1085600 doi: 10.3109/03091902.2015.1085600. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  30. Abdel-Fattah M, Familusi A, Fielding S, Ford J, Bhattacharya S. Primary and repeat surgical treatment for female pelvic organ prolapse and incontinence in parous women in the UK: a register linkage study. BMJ Open 2011;1:e000206. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000206 doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000206. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  31. Wu JM, Matthews CA, Conover MM, Pate V, Jonsson Funk M. Lifetime risk of stress urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Obstet Gynecol 2014;123:1201–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000000286 doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000286. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  32. NHS Digital. NHS Digital Publishes Statistics on Vaginal Mesh Procedures. URL: https://digital.nhs.uk/news-and-events/latest-news/nhs-digital-publishes-statistics-on-vaginal-mesh-procedures (accessed January 2021).
  33. Wagner TH, Hu TW. Economic costs of urinary incontinence in 1995. Urology 1998;51:355–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00623-7 doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00623-7. [DOI] [PubMed]
  34. Cody J, Wyness L, Wallace S, Glazener C, Kilonzo M, Stearns S, et al. Systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of tension-free vaginal tape for treatment of urinary stress incontinence. Health Technol Assess 2003;7(21). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta7210 doi: 10.3310/hta7210. [DOI] [PubMed]
  35. Brazzelli M, Javanbakht M, Imamura M, Hudson J, Moloney E, Becker F, et al. Surgical treatments for women with stress urinary incontinence: the ESTER systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2019;23(14). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta23140 doi: 10.3310/hta23140. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  36. Hay-Smith EJ, Bø Berghmans LC, Hendriks HJ, de Bie RA, van Waalwijk van Doorn ES. Pelvic floor muscle training for urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;1:CD001407. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001407.pub3 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001407.pub3. [DOI] [PubMed]
  37. Hagen S, Elders A, Stratton S, Sergenson N, Bugge C, Dean S, et al. Effectiveness of pelvic floor muscle training with and without electromyographic biofeedback for urinary incontinence in women: multicentre randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2020;371:m3719. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3719 doi: 10.1136/bmj.m3719. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  38. Mariappan P, Ballantyne Z, N’Dow JM, Alhasso AA. Serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRI) for stress urinary incontinence in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005;3:CD004742. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004742.pub2 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004742.pub2. [DOI] [PubMed]
  39. Staskin D, Bavendam T, Miller J, Davila GW, Diokno A, Knapp P, et al. Effectiveness of a urinary control insert in the management of stress urinary incontinence: early results of a multicenter study. Urology 1996;47:629–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00003-9 doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00003-9. [DOI] [PubMed]
  40. Peschers U, Zen Ruffinen F, Schaer GN, Schüssler B. The VIVA urethral plug: a sensible expansion of the spectrum for conservative therapy of urinary stress incontinence? Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 1996;56:118–23. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-1022276 doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1022276. [DOI] [PubMed]
  41. Farrell SA, Singh B, Aldakhil L. Continence pessaries in the management of urinary incontinence in women. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2004;26:113–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1701-2163(16)30486-8 doi: 10.1016/S1701-2163(16)30486-8. [DOI] [PubMed]
  42. Hinoul P, Roovers JP, Ombelet W, Vanspauwen R. Surgical management of urinary stress incontinence in women: a historical and clinical overview. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2009;145:219–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2009.04.020 doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2009.04.020. [DOI] [PubMed]
  43. Abrams P, Hilton P, Lucas M, Smith T. A proposal for a new classification for operative procedures for stress urinary incontinence. BJU Int 2005;96:232–3. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05607.x doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05607.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  44. Feyereisl J, Dreher E, Haenggi W, Zikmund J, Schneider H. Long-term results after Burch colposuspension. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994;171:647–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(94)90077-9 doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(94)90077-9. [DOI] [PubMed]
  45. Chaliha C, Stanton SL. Complications of surgery for genuine stress incontinence. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999;106:1238–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1999.tb08176.x doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1999.tb08176.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  46. Tong JL, Zhu L, Lang JH. [Effects of laparoscopic Burch colposuspension and tension-free vaginal tape in treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: a comparative study.] Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi 2008;88:3192–4. [PubMed]
  47. Andrada Hamer M, Persson J. Preoperative urethral parameters at rest and objective cure following laparoscopic colposuspension. Int Urogynecol J 2010;21:331–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-1034-3 doi: 10.1007/s00192-009-1034-3. [DOI] [PubMed]
  48. Yoon WS, Lee HN, Lee YS, Jeung IC, Park EK. Laparoscopic colposuspension to the Cooper’s ligament after hysterectomy for uterovaginal prolapse. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2013;39:714–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1447-0756.2012.02038.x doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2012.02038.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  49. Kitchener HC, Dunn G, Lawton V, Reid F, Nelson L, Smith AR, COLPO Study Group. Laparoscopic versus open colposuspension – results of a prospective randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2006;113:1007–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01035.x doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01035.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  50. Liu CY. Laparoscopic treatment for genuine urinary stress incontinence. Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol 1994;8:789–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0950-3552(05)80056-2 doi: 10.1016/s0950-3552(05)80056-2. [DOI] [PubMed]
  51. Aldridge A. Transplantation of fascia for the relief of urinary stress incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1942;44:398–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(42)90477-0 doi: 10.1016/S0002-9378(42)90477-0. [DOI]
  52. Enzelsberger H, Helmer H, Schatten C. Comparison of Burch and lyodura sling procedures for repair of unsuccessful incontinence surgery. Obstet Gynecol 1996;88:251–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-7844(96)00193-7 doi: 10.1016/0029-7844(96)00193-7. [DOI] [PubMed]
  53. Bai SW, Sohn WH, Chung DJ, Park JH, Kim SK. Comparison of the efficacy of Burch colposuspension, pubovaginal sling, and tension-free vaginal tape for stress urinary incontinence. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005;91:246–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2005.08.023 doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2005.08.023. [DOI] [PubMed]
  54. Albo M, Wruck L, Baker J, Brubaker L, Chai T, Dandreo KJ, et al. The relationships among measures of incontinence severity in women undergoing surgery for stress urinary incontinence. J Urol 2007;177:1810–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.01.032 doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.01.032. [DOI] [PubMed]
  55. Ulmsten U, Henriksson L, Johnson P, Varhos G. An ambulatory surgical procedure under local anesthesia for treatment of female urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 1996;7:81–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01902378 doi: 10.1007/BF01902378. [DOI] [PubMed]
  56. Petros PP, Ulmsten U. An anatomical classification – a new paradigm for management of female lower urinary tract dysfunction. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1998;80:87–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-2115(98)00092-X doi: 10.1016/S0301-2115(98)00092-X. [DOI] [PubMed]
  57. DeLancey JO. Structural support of the urethra as it relates to stress urinary incontinence: the hammock hypothesis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994;170:1713–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(12)91840-2 doi: 10.1016/S0002-9378(12)91840-2. [DOI] [PubMed]
  58. Lapitan MC, Cody JD. Open retropubic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;6:CD002912. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002912.pub5 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002912.pub5. [DOI] [PubMed]
  59. Assassa P, Moran P, Duckett J, Bsug B. Stress incontinence surgery in the UK (1). Pre-operative work up and intra-operative complications. Analysis of the British Society of Urogynaecology database. Neurourol Urodyn 2010;29:809–10.
  60. Delorme E. [Transobturator urethral suspension: mini-invasive procedure in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women.] Prog Urol 2001;11:1306–13. [PubMed]
  61. de Leval J, Waltregny D. New surgical technique for treatment of stress urinary incontinence TVT-Obturator: new developments and results. Surg Technol Int 2005;14:212–21. [PubMed]
  62. Ogah J, Cody JD, Rogerson L. Minimally Invasive Synthetic Suburethral Sling Operations for Stress Urinary Incontinence in Women (Review). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2010. URL: www.sauga.org.za/content/images/Cochrane_stress_incontinence.pdf (accessed 1 April 2021). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006375.pub2 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006375.pub2. [DOI] [PubMed]
  63. Latthe PM, Singh P, Foon R, Toozs-Hobson P. Two routes of transobturator tape procedures in stress urinary incontinence: a meta-analysis with direct and indirect comparison of randomized trials. BJU Int 2010;106:68–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09051.x doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09051.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  64. Madhuvrata P, Riad M, Ammembal MK, Agur W, Abdel-Fattah M. Systematic review and meta-analysis of ‘inside–out’ versus ‘outside–in’ transobturator tapes in management of stress urinary incontinence in women. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2012;162:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.01.004 doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.01.004. [DOI] [PubMed]
  65. Abdel-Fattah M, Mostafa A, Familusi A, Ramsay I, N’dow J. Prospective randomised controlled trial of transobturator tapes in management of urodynamic stress incontinence in women: 3-year outcomes from the Evaluation of Transobturator Tapes study. Eur Urol 2012;62:843–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.04.021 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.04.021. [DOI] [PubMed]
  66. Abdel-Fattah M, Ramsay I. Transobturator tension free vaginal tapes: are they the way forward in the surgical treatment of urodynamic stress incontinence? Int J Surg 2007;5:3–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2005.12.002 doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2005.12.002. [DOI] [PubMed]
  67. Smith AR, Dmochowski R, Hilton P, Nilsson CG, Reid F, Rovner E. Surgery for Urinary Incontinence. In Abrams P, Cardozo L, Khoury S, editors. Incontinence. Plymouth: Health Publication Ltd; 2009.
  68. Novara G, Artibani W, Barber MD, Chapple CR, Costantini E, Ficarra V, et al. Updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the comparative data on colposuspensions, pubovaginal slings, and midurethral tapes in the surgical treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. Eur Urol 2010;58:218–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2010.04.022 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.04.022. [DOI] [PubMed]
  69. Ogah J, Cody DJ, Rogerson L. Minimally invasive synthetic suburethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women: a short version Cochrane review. Neurourol Urodyn 2011;30:284–91. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20980 doi: 10.1002/nau.20980. [DOI] [PubMed]
  70. Liapis A, Bakas P, Giner M, Creatsas G. Tension-free vaginal tape versus tension-free vaginal tape obturator in women with stress urinary incontinence. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2006;62:160–4. https://doi.org/10.1159/000093320 doi: 10.1159/000093320. [DOI] [PubMed]
  71. Gillies T. Scottish Independent Review of the Use, Safety and Efficacy of Transvaginal Mesh Implants in the Treatment of Stress Urinary Incontinence and Pelvic Organ Prolapse in Women: Final Report March 2017. Edinburgh: Scottish Government; 2017. URL: www.gov.scot/publications/scottish-independent-review-use-safety-efficacy-transvaginal-mesh-implants-treatment-9781786528711/ (accessed 1 April 2021).
  72. Debodinance P, Lagrange E, Amblard J, Lenoble C, Lucot JP, Villet R, et al. [TVT Secur: more and more minimally invasive. Preliminary prospective study of 110 cases.] J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 2008;37:229–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgyn.2008.01.008 doi: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2008.01.008. [DOI] [PubMed]
  73. Meschia M, Barbacini P, Baccichet R, Buonaguidi A, Maffiolini M, Ricci L, et al. Short-term outcomes with the Ajust™ system: a new single incision sling for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 2011;22:177–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-010-1254-6 doi: 10.1007/s00192-010-1254-6. [DOI] [PubMed]
  74. Abdel-Fattah M, Agur W, Abdel-All M, Guerrero K, Allam M, Mackintosh A, et al. Prospective multi-centre study of adjustable single-incision mini-sling (Ajust®) in the management of stress urinary incontinence in women: 1-year follow-up study. BJU Int 2012;109:880–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10471.x doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10471.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  75. Berkers J, Van Der Aa F, Hamid D, De Ridder D. The minimal invasive MiniArc sling versus Monarc trans-obturator sling system in the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 2009;20:S253–S4.
  76. De Ridder D, Berkers J, Deprest J, Verguts J, Ost D, Hamid D, Van der Aa F. Single incision mini-sling versus a transobutaror sling: a comparative study on MiniArc and Monarc slings. Int Urogynecol J 2010;21:773–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-010-1127-z doi: 10.1007/s00192-010-1127-z. [DOI] [PubMed]
  77. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Single-incision Sub-urethral Short Tape Insertion for Stress Urinary Incontinence in Women. Interventional procedures guidance [IPG262]. URL: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ipg262/documents/ipg262-singleincision-suburethral-short-tape-insertion-for-stress-urinary-incontinence-in-women-understanding-nice-guidance-ms-word-format2 (accessed 1 April 2021).
  78. Abdel-Fattah M, Ford JA, Lim CP, Madhuvrata P. Single-incision mini-slings versus standard midurethral slings in surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence: a meta-analysis of effectiveness and complications. Eur Urol 2011;60:468–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.05.003 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.05.003. [DOI] [PubMed]
  79. Gadjiev N, Tabaza R, Kirschner-Hermanns R. Mini-sling: what is known about anchorage systems? Neurourol Urodyn 2012;31:709–1102.
  80. Kocjancic E, Sedlar A. A strength comparison of immediate and delayed extraction forces of 5 different single incision slings anchor types: an animal model. Int Urogynecol J 2012;23:S115.
  81. Mostafa A, Lim CP, Hopper L, Madhuvrata P, Abdel-Fattah M. Single-incision mini-slings versus standard midurethral slings in surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness and complications. Eur Urol 2014;65:402–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.08.032 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.08.032. [DOI] [PubMed]
  82. Tommaselli GA, Di Carlo C, Gargano V, Formisano C, Scala M, Nappi C. Efficacy and safety of TVT-O and TVT-Secur in the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: 1-year follow-up. Int Urogynecol J 2010;21:1211–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-010-1181-6 doi: 10.1007/s00192-010-1181-6. [DOI] [PubMed]
  83. Hinoul P, Vervest HA, den Boon J, Venema PL, Lakeman MM, Milani AL, Roovers JP. A randomized, controlled trial comparing an innovative single incision sling with an established transobturator sling to treat female stress urinary incontinence. J Urol 2011;185:1356–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.11.083 doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.11.083. [DOI] [PubMed]
  84. Barber MD, Weidner AC, Sokol AI, Amundsen CL, Jelovsek JE, Karram MM, et al. Single-incision mini-sling compared with tension-free vaginal tape for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2012;119:328–37. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e318242a849 doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318242a849. [DOI] [PubMed]
  85. Dover C, Leverson G, McAchran S. Complication rates of single incision slings – meta-analysis of the world literature. Neurourol Urodyn 2012;31:253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.595 doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.595. [DOI]
  86. Mostafa A, Agur W, Abdel-All M, Guerrero K, Lim C, Allam M, et al. Multicenter prospective randomized study of single-incision mini-sling vs. tension-free vaginal tape-obturator in management of female stress urinary incontinence: a minimum of 1-year follow-up. Urology 2013;82:552–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2013.02.080 doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.02.080. [DOI] [PubMed]
  87. Schweitzer K, Cromheecke A, Milani H, Van Eijndhoven D, Gietelink E, Hallenleben C, et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing the TVT-O® with the Ajust® as primary surgical treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 2012;23:S77–S8.
  88. Cornu J, Ciofu C, Sebe P, Peyrat L, Haab F. Cure of women stress urinary incontinence with the Ajust single incision sling: 1 year results. Neurourol Urodyn 2011;30:868.
  89. Lucente V, Cornu J, Sebe P, Peyrat L, Ciofu C, Haab F. Ajust single incision transobturator sling procedure for stress urinary incontinenvce in women. Int Urogynecol J 2011;22:S1041. doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-1740-0. [DOI] [PubMed]
  90. Sivaslioglu AA, Unlubilgin E, Aydogmus S, Keskin L, Dolen I. A prospective randomized controlled trial of the transobturator tape and tissue fixation mini-sling in patients with stress urinary incontinence: 5-year results. J Urol 2012;188:194–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.2564 doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.2564. [DOI] [PubMed]
  91. Naumann G, Hagemeier T, Zachmann S, Ali-Ani A, Skala C, Albrich S, et al. Ajust™ fully adjustable single incision sling for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence: 1 year follow-up on a new minimal-invasive treatment for female SUI. Int Urogynecol J 2011;22(Suppl. 2):S1050. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-1843-7 doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-1843-7. [DOI]
  92. Boyers D, Kilonzo M, Mostafa A, Abdel-Fattah M. Single incision mini-slings versus standard mid-urethral slings in surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence: a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial. Neurourol Urodyn 2012;31:726–7.
  93. Nambiar A, Cody JD, Jeffery ST. Single-incision sling operations for urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;6:CD008709. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008709.pub2 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008709.pub2. [DOI] [PubMed]
  94. Beard DJ, Davies LJ, Cook JA, MacLennan G, Price A, Kent S, et al. Total versus partial knee replacement in patients with medial compartment knee osteoarthritis: the TOPKAT RCT. Health Technol Assess 2020;24(20). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta24200 doi: 10.3310/hta24200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  95. International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Development Group. International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire – Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UI SF). URL: https://iciq.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Sample-ICIQ-UI-Short-Form.pdf (accessed 9 March 2020).
  96. Cardozo L, Coyne KS, Versi E. Validation of the urgency perception scale. BJU Int 2005;95:591–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05345.x doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05345.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  97. International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Development Group. International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire – Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Long Form Module (ICIQ-FLUTS LF). URL: https://iciq.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Sample-ICIQ-FLUTS-LF.pdf (accessed 9 March 2020).
  98. Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med 2001;33:337–43. https://doi.org/10.3109/07853890109002087 doi: 10.3109/07853890109002087. [DOI] [PubMed]
  99. International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Development Group. International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire – Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Quality of Life Module (ICIQ-LUTSqol). URL: https://iciq.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Sample-ICIQ-LUTSqol.pdf (accessed 9 March 2020).
  100. International Urogynecological Association. Appendix A: PISQ-IR Sexual Function for Women with POP, Urinary Incontinence and/or Fecal Incontinence. URL: www.iuga.org/images/content/PISQ-IR_Instrument_English.pdf (accessed 15 March 2020).
  101. International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Development Group. International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Female Sexual Matters Associated with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Module (ICIQ-FLUTSsex). URL: https://iciq.net/iciq-flutssex (accessed 9 March 2021).
  102. Yalcin I, Bump RC. Validation of two global impression questionnaires for incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;189:98–101. https://doi.org/10.1067/mob.2003.379 doi: 10.1067/mob.2003.379. [DOI] [PubMed]
  103. Sanders GD, Neumann PJ, Basu A, Brock DW, Feeny D, Krahn M, et al. Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses: second panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 2016;316:1093–103. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.12195 doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.12195. [DOI] [PubMed]
  104. Clark MD, Determann D, Petrou S, Moro D, de Bekker-Grob EW. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. PharmacoEconomics 2014;32:883–902. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-014-0170-x doi: 10.1007/s40273-014-0170-x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  105. Soekhai V, Whichello C, Levitan B, Veldwijk J, Pinto CA, Donkers B, et al. Methods for exploring and eliciting patient preferences in the medical product lifecycle: a literature review. Drug Discov Today 2019;24:1324–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drudis.2019.05.001 doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2019.05.001. [DOI] [PubMed]
  106. Lancaster K. A new approach to consumer theory. J Politic Econ 1966;74:132–57. https://doi.org/10.1086/259131 doi: 10.1086/259131. [DOI]
  107. Ryan M, Gerard K, Amaya-Amaya M. Using Discrete Choice Experiments to Value Health and Health Care. Dordrecht: Springer; 2008. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5753-3 doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-5753-3. [DOI]
  108. ChoiceMetrics. NGENE User Guide and Reference Manual. Sydney, NSW: ChoiceMetrics; 2014.
  109. McFadden D. Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior. In Zarembka P, editor. Frontiers in Econometrics. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1973.
  110. McFadden D, Train K. Mixed MNL models for discrete response. J Appl Econom 2000;15:447–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1255(200009/10)15:5<447::AID-JAE570>3.0.CO;2-1 doi: 10.1002/1099-1255(200009/10)15:5&#x0003c;447::AID-JAE570&#x0003e;3.0.CO;2-1. [DOI]
  111. Hole AR. Fitting mixed logit models by using maximum simulated likelihood. Stata J 2007;7:388–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X0700700306 doi: 10.1177/1536867X0700700306. [DOI]
  112. Glazener C, Boachie C, Buckley B, Cochran C, Dorey G. Conservative treatment for urinary incontinence in Men After Prostate Surgery (MAPS): two parallel randomised controlled trials. Health Technol Assess 2011;15(24). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta15240 doi: 10.3310/hta15240. [DOI] [PubMed]
  113. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. Process and methods [PMG9]. URL: www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg9/chapter/foreword (accessed 1 April 2021). [PubMed]
  114. Manca A, Palmer S. Handling missing data in patient-level cost-effectiveness analysis alongside randomised clinical trials. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2005;4:65–75. https://doi.org/10.2165/00148365-200504020-00001 doi: 10.2165/00148365-200504020-00001. [DOI] [PubMed]
  115. Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 2013;11:6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-7547-11-6 doi: 10.1186/1478-7547-11-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  116. Curtis L, Burns A. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2019. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent; 2019. URL: www.pssru.ac.uk/project-pages/unit-costs/unit-costs-2019/ (accessed 1 April 2021).
  117. Hemming C, Constable L, Goulao B, Kilonzo M, Boyers D, Elders A, et al. Surgical interventions for uterine prolapse and for vault prolapse: the two VUE RCTs. Health Technol Assess 2020;24(13). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta24130 doi: 10.3310/hta24130. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  118. Joint Formulary Committee. British National Formulary (online). London: BMJ Group and Pharmaceutical Press. URL: www.medicinescomplete.com (accessed 4 March 2020).
  119. NHS England. 2018/19 National Cost Collection Data Publication. URL: www.england.nhs.uk/publication/2018-19-national-cost-collection-data-publication/ (accessed 23 May 2022).
  120. Information Services Division Scotland. R140X Theatre Services. URL: www.isdscotland.org/Health-topics/Finance/Costs/Detailed-Tables/Theatres.asp (accessed 20 September 2019).
  121. NHS Business Services Authority. NHS Electronic Drug Tariff. URL: www.drugtariff.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/#/00730181-DC/DC00730158/Home (accessed 20 June 2020).
  122. Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. Expenses and Benefits: Business Travel Mileage for Employees’ Own Vehicles. URL: www.gov.uk/expenses-and-benefits-business-travel-mileage/rules-for-tax (accessed 30 November 2019).
  123. Office for National Statistics. Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings: 2019 Revised Results. URL: www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/datasets/allemployeesashetable1 (accessed 15 December 2020).
  124. Office for National Statistics. Women Shoulder the Responsibility of ‘Unpaid Work’. URL: www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/articles/womenshouldertheresponsibilityofunpaidwork/2016-11-10 (accessed 15 December 2020).
  125. Department for Transport. TAG Data Book 2020. URL: www.gov.uk/government/publications/webtag-tag-data-book (accessed 15 December 2020).
  126. Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 1997;35:1095–108. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199711000-00002 doi: 10.1097/00005650-199711000-00002. [DOI] [PubMed]
  127. Richardson G, Manca A. Calculation of quality adjusted life years in the published literature: a review of methodology and transparency. Health Econ 2004;13:1203–10. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.901 doi: 10.1002/hec.901. [DOI] [PubMed]
  128. Brazier J, Czoski-Murray C, Roberts J, Brown M, Symonds T, Kelleher C. Estimation of a preference-based index from a condition-specific measure: the King’s Health Questionnaire. Med Decis Making 2008;28:113–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X07301820 doi: 10.1177/0272989X07301820. [DOI] [PubMed]
  129. Glick HA, Doshi JA, Sonnad SS, Polsky D. Economic Evaluation in Clinical Trials. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015. https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780199685028.001.0001 doi: 10.1093/med/9780199685028.001.0001. [DOI]
  130. Drummond MF, Sculpher M, Torrance GW, O’Brien B, Stoddart GL. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005.
  131. Rubin D. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 2004.
  132. Thüroff JW, Abrams P, Andersson KE, Artibani W, Chapple CR, Drake MJ, et al. EAU guidelines on urinary incontinence. Eur Urol 2011;59:387–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2010.11.021 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.11.021. [DOI] [PubMed]
  133. van Buuren S. Flexible Imputation of Missing Data. 2nd edn. New York, NY: Chapman and Hall/CRC; 2018. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429492259 doi: 10.1201/9780429492259. [DOI]
  134. Engberts MK, Schweitzer KJ, van Eijndhoven HWF, Cromheecke GJ, Naber HR, Huub van der Vaart C. A prospective observational cohort study of the Ajust® single incision sling performed under conscious sedation with local infiltration. Neurourol Urodyn 2019;38:1632–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.24027 doi: 10.1002/nau.24027. [DOI] [PubMed]
  135. Simsek A, Kirecci SL, Bayar G, Horasanli K, Ozgor F, Gurbuz ZG. Evaluation of per-operative cough stress test during transobturator mid-urethral sling surgery. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2017;89:222–5. https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2017.3.222 doi: 10.4081/aiua.2017.3.222. [DOI] [PubMed]
  136. Mostafa A, Agur W, Abdel-All M, Guerrero K, Lim C, Allam M, et al. A multicentre prospective randomised study of single-incision mini-sling (Ajust®) versus tension-free vaginal tape-obturator (TVT-O™) in the management of female stress urinary incontinence: pain profile and short-term outcomes. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2012;165:115–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.06.022 doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.06.022. [DOI] [PubMed]
  137. Schellart RP, Oude Rengerink K, Van der Aa F, Lucot JP, Kimpe B, Dijkgraaf MG, Roovers JP. A randomised comparison of single-incision versus traditional transobturator midurethral sling in women with stress urinary incontinence: results of a 24-month follow-up. Int Urogynecol J 2016;27:871–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-015-2898-z doi: 10.1007/s00192-015-2898-z. [DOI] [PubMed]
  138. Xin X, Song Y, Xia Z. A comparison between adjustable single-incision sling and tension-free vaginal tape-obturator in treating stress urinary incontinence. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2016;293:457–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-015-3949-x doi: 10.1007/s00404-015-3949-x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  139. Abdel-Fattah M, Ramsay I, Pringle S, Hardwick C, Ali H, Young D, Mostafa A. Randomised prospective single-blinded study comparing ‘inside-out’ versus ‘outside-in’ transobturator tapes in the management of urodynamic stress incontinence: 1-year outcomes from the E-TOT study. BJOG 2010;117:870–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02544.x doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02544.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  140. Karmakar D, Mostafa A, Abdel-Fattah M. Long-term outcomes of transobturator tapes in women with stress urinary incontinence: E-TOT randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2017;124:973–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.14561 doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.14561. [DOI] [PubMed]
  141. Alexandridis V, Rudnicki M, Jakobsson U, Teleman P. Adjustable mini-sling compared with conventional mid-urethral slings in women with urinary incontinence: a 3-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Int Urogynecol J 2019;30:1465–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-04004-w doi: 10.1007/s00192-019-04004-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  142. Nikpoor P, Karjalainen PK, Ow LL, Melendez-Munoz J, Leitch A, Ryan G, et al. Modified transobturator (TVT Abbrevo) and single incision (MiniArc) suburethral sling in women with stress urinary incontinence – a randomised controlled trial: 3 year follow up. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 2019;25(5 Suppl. 1):S92–S3.
  143. Lee S, Cho S. Single incision mid-urethral sling and tension-free vaginal tape procedure for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence: a 36-month follow-up randomized study. Int Urogynecol J 2018;29:S138.
  144. Cumberlege J. First Do No Harm: The Report of the Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Review. London: Department of Health and Social Care; 2020. URL: www.immdsreview.org.uk/downloads/IMMDSReview_Web.pdf (accessed 1 April 2021).
  145. Tincello DG, Alfirevic Z. Important clinical outcomes in urogynecology: views of patients, nurses and medical staff. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2002;13:96–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001920200022 doi: 10.1007/s001920200022. [DOI] [PubMed]
  146. Corcos J, Beaulieu S, Donovan J, Naughton M, Gotoh M, Symptom Quality of Life Assesment Committee of the First International Consultation on Incontinence. Quality of life assessment in men and women with urinary incontinence. J Urol 2002;168:896–905. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000024401.79394.21 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64540-5 doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000024401.79394.21. [DOI] [PubMed]
  147. Karantanis E, Fynes M, Moore KH, Stanton SL. Comparison of the ICIQ-SF and 24-hour pad test with other measures for evaluating the severity of urodynamic stress incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2004;15:111–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-004-1123-2 doi: 10.1007/s00192-004-1123-2. [DOI] [PubMed]
  148. Tincello DG, Kenyon S, Abrams KR, Mayne C, Toozs-Hobson P, Taylor D, Slack M. Botulinum toxin A versus placebo for refractory detrusor overactivity in women: a randomised blinded placebo-controlled trial of 240 women (the RELAX study). Eur Urol 2012;62:507–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.12.056 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.12.056. [DOI] [PubMed]
  149. Brubaker L, Richter HE, Visco A, Mahajan S, Nygaard I, Braun TM, et al. Refractory idiopathic urge urinary incontinence and botulinum A injection. J Urol 2008;180:217–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.028 doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.028. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  150. Serati M, Braga A, Athanasiou S, Tommaselli GA, Caccia G, Torella M, et al. Tension-free vaginal tape-obturator for treatment of pure urodynamic stress urinary incontinence: efficacy and adverse effects at 10-year follow-up. Eur Urol 2017;71:674–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.054 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.054. [DOI] [PubMed]
  151. Ulrich D, Tammaa A, Hölbfer S, Trutnovsky G, Bjelic-Radisic V, Tamussino K, Aigmüller T. Ten-year follow-up after tension-free vaginal tape-obturator procedure for stress urinary incontinence. J Urol 2016;196:1201–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.036 doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.036. [DOI] [PubMed]
  152. Abdel-Fattah M, Mostafa A, Brown K, Guerrero K, Ward K, Cotterill N, et al. Female Urgency, Trial of Urodynamics as Routine Evaluation (FUTURE study); A Superiority Randomised Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of Invasive Urodynamic Investigations in Management of Women with Refractory Overactive Bladder Symptoms. URL: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hta/1515005/#/ (accessed 4 March 2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05661-3 doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05661-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  153. Masata J, Svabik K, Zvara K, Hubka P, Toman A, Martan A. Comparison of the efficacy of tension-free vaginal tape obturator (TVT-O) and single-incision tension-free vaginal tape (Ajust™) in the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: a 1-year follow-up randomized trial. Int Urogynecol J 2016;27:1497–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3012-x doi: 10.1007/s00192-016-3012-x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  154. Maturana AP, Palos CC, Ghersel FR, Fernandes CE, Oliveira E. Randomized controlled trial comparing mini-sling with transobturator sling for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 2020;31:1925–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-04145-y doi: 10.1007/s00192-019-04145-y. [DOI] [PubMed]
  155. Pascom ALG, Djehdian LM, Bortolini MAT, Jarmy-Di Bella ZIK, Delroy CA, Tamanini JTN, Castro RA. Randomized controlled trial comparing single-incision mini-sling and transobturator midurethral sling for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence: 3-year follow-up results. Neurourol Urodyn 2018;37:2184–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23546 doi: 10.1002/nau.23546. [DOI] [PubMed]
  156. Jurakova M, Huser M, Belkov I, Janku P, Hudecek R, Stourac P, et al. Prospective randomized comparison of the transobturator mid-urethral sling with the single-incision sling among women with stress urinary incontinence: 1-year follow-up study. Int Urogynecol J 2016;27:791–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-015-2895-2 doi: 10.1007/s00192-015-2895-2. [DOI] [PubMed]
  157. Tieu AL, Hegde A, Castillo PA, Davila GW, Aguilar VC. Transobturator versus single incision slings: 1-year results of a randomized controlled trial. Int Urogynecol J 2017;28:461–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3128-z doi: 10.1007/s00192-016-3128-z. [DOI] [PubMed]
  158. Sabadell J, Palau-Gené M, Huguet E, Montero-Armengol A, Salicrú S, Poza JL. Multicentre randomized trial of the Ajust™ single-incision sling compared to the Align™ transobturator tape sling. Int Urogynecol J 2017;28:1041–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3221-3 doi: 10.1007/s00192-016-3221-3. [DOI] [PubMed]
  159. Gaber ME, Borg T, Samour H, Nawara M, Reda A. Two new mini-slings compared with transobturator tension-free vaginal tape for treatment of stress urinary incontinence: A 1-year follow-up randomized controlled trial. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2016;42:1773–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/jog.13143 doi: 10.1111/jog.13143. [DOI] [PubMed]
  160. Enzelsberger H, Cemer I, Enzelsberger S, Schalupny J. MiniArc® versus Monarc® – Eine prospektiv randomisierte Vergleichsstudie zur operativen Therapie der weiblichen Stressharninkontinenz. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2010;70:499–502. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0030-1249952 doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1249952. [DOI]
  161. Masata J, Svabik K, Hubka P, Martan A. Randomized trial to compare the efficacy of TVT-O and single incision tape ajust in the treatment of stress urinary incontinent women – two year follow-up. Neurourol Urodyn 2015;34:S418–S20.
  162. Basu M, Duckett J. Three-year results from a randomised trial of a retropubic mid-urethral sling versus the MiniArc single incision sling for stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 2013;24:2059–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2125-8 doi: 10.1007/s00192-013-2125-8. [DOI] [PubMed]
  163. Angleitner-Flotzinger J, Aigmueller T. Mid-term follow-up of the TVT-Secur midurethral sling for primary stress incontinence. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014;180:24–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.06.015 doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.06.015. [DOI] [PubMed]
  164. Masata J, Svabik K, Hubka P, Martan A. Randomized prospective trial of a comparison of the efficacy of TVT-O and TVT-Secur system in the treatment of stress urinary incontinent women – long-term results with a minimum of 5 years follow-up. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2015;26:S137–S8.
  165. Irwin DE, Milsom I, Chancellor MB, Kopp Z, Guan Z. Dynamic progression of overactive bladder and urinary incontinence symptoms: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2010;58:532–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2010.06.007 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.06.007. [DOI] [PubMed]
  166. Duckett JR, Tamilselvi A. Effect of tension-free vaginal tape in women with a urodynamic diagnosis of idiopathic detrusor overactivity and stress incontinence. BJOG 2006;113:30–3. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00810.x doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00810.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  167. Lee JH, Cho MC, Oh SJ, Kim SW, Paick JS. Long-term outcome of the tension-free vaginal tape procedure in female urinary incontinence: a 6-year follow-up. Korean J Urol 2010;51:409–15. https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2010.51.6.409 doi: 10.4111/kju.2010.51.6.409. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  168. Abdel-Fattah M, Mostafa A, Young D, Ramsay I. Evaluation of transobturator tension-free vaginal tapes in the management of women with mixed urinary incontinence: one-year outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011;205:150.e1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2011.03.018 doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2011.03.018. [DOI] [PubMed]
  169. Abdel-Fattah M, Hopper LR, Mostafa A. Evaluation of transobturator tension-free vaginal tapes in the surgical management of mixed urinary incontinence: 3-year outcomes of a randomized controlled trial. J Urol 2014;191:114–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.07.035 doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.07.035. [DOI] [PubMed]
  170. Abdel-Fattah M, Cao G, Mostafa A. Long-term outcomes for transobturator tension-free vaginal tapes in women with urodynamic mixed urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn 2017;36:902–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23192 doi: 10.1002/nau.23192. [DOI] [PubMed]
  171. Ahn SH, Park YJ, Kong MK, Bai SW. Impact of age on outcomes of midurethral sling procedures in women. Int Urogynecol J 2020;31:785–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-04112-7 doi: 10.1007/s00192-019-04112-7. [DOI] [PubMed]
  172. Engen M, Svenningsen R, Schiøtz HA, Kulseng-Hanssen S. Mid-urethral slings in young, middle-aged, and older women. Neurourol Urodyn 2018;37:2578–85. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23583 doi: 10.1002/nau.23583. [DOI] [PubMed]
  173. Malek JM, Ellington DR, Jauk V, Szychowski JM, Parden AM, Richter HE. The effect of age on stress and urgency urinary incontinence outcomes in women undergoing primary midurethral sling. Int Urogynecol J 2015;26:831–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2594-4 doi: 10.1007/s00192-014-2594-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  174. Ward K, Hilton P, United Kingdom and Ireland Tension-free Vaginal Tape Trial Group. Prospective multicentre randomised trial of tension-free vaginal tape and colposuspension as primary treatment for stress incontinence. BMJ 2002;325:67. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.325.7355.67 doi: 10.1136/bmj.325.7355.67. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  175. Dias J, Xambre L, Costa L, Costa P, Ferraz L. Short-term outcomes of Altis single-incision sling procedure for stress urinary incontinence: a prospective single-center study. Int Urogynecol J 2014;25:1089–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2355-4 doi: 10.1007/s00192-014-2355-4. [DOI] [PubMed]
  176. Kocjancic E, Erickson T, Tu LM, Gheiler E, Van Drie D. Two-year outcomes for the Altis® adjustable single incision sling system for treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn 2017;36:1582–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23156 doi: 10.1002/nau.23156. [DOI] [PubMed]
  177. Kim A, Kim MS, Park YJ, Choi WS, Park HK, Paick SH, et al. Clinical outcome of single-incision slings, excluding TVT-Secur, vs. standard slings in the surgical management of stress incontinence: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int 2019;123:566–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14447 doi: 10.1111/bju.14447. [DOI] [PubMed]
  178. Schellart RP, Zwolsman SE, Lucot JP, de Ridder DJMK, Dijkgraaf MGW, Roovers JWR. A randomized, nonblinded extension study of single-incision versus transobturator midurethral sling in women with stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 2018;29:37–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3362-z doi: 10.1007/s00192-017-3362-z. [DOI] [PubMed]
  179. Matharu GS, Assassa RP, Williams KS, Donaldson M, Matthews R, Tincello DG, Mayne CJ. Objective assessment of urinary incontinence in women: comparison of the one-hour and 24-hour pad tests. Eur Urol 2004;45:208–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2003.09.006 doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2003.09.006. [DOI] [PubMed]
  180. Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. A Summary of the Evidence on the Benefits and Risks of Vaginal Mesh Implants. URL: www.gov.uk/government/publications/vaginal-mesh-implants-summary-of-benefits-and-risks (accessed 1 April 2021).
  181. Dyer O. Johnson and Johnson faces lawsuit over vaginal mesh devices. BMJ 2016;353:i3045. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i3045 doi: 10.1136/bmj.i3045. [DOI] [PubMed]
  182. Moldovan CP, Marinone ME, Staack A. Transvaginal retropubic sling systems: efficacy and patient acceptability. Int J Womens Health 2015;7:227–37. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S59265 doi: 10.2147/IJWH.S59265. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  183. Morling JR, McAllister DA, Agur W, Fischbacher CM, Glazener CMA, Guerrero K, et al. Adverse events after first, single, mesh and non-mesh surgical procedures for stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in Scotland, 1997–2016: a population-based cohort study. Lancet 2016;389:629–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32572-7 doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32572-7. [DOI] [PubMed]
  184. Haskell H. Cumberlege review exposes stubborn and dangerous flaws in healthcare. BMJ 2020;370:m3099. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3099 doi: 10.1136/bmj.m3099. [DOI] [PubMed]
  185. British Society of Urogynaecology. Stress Urinary Incontinence Surgery in the UK 2008–2017: 1st National Report – Audit and Database Committee 2018. London: British Society of Urogynaecology; 2018. URL: https://bsug.org.uk/budcms/includes/kcfinder/upload/files/reports/BSUG-Stress-Incontinence-Surgery---1st-National-Report.pdf (accessed 1 April 2021).
  186. NHS Digital. Hospital Episode Statistics 2020. URL: https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/data-tools-and-services/data-services/hospital-episode-statistics (accessed 31 March 2021).
  187. Richter HE, Albo ME, Zyczynski HM, Kenton K, Norton PA, Sirls LT, et al. Retropubic versus transobturator midurethral slings for stress incontinence. N Engl J Med 2010;362:2066–76. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0912658 doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0912658. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  188. Abdel-Fattah M, Ramsay I, Pringle S. Lower urinary tract injuries after transobturator tape insertion by different routes: a large retrospective study. BJOG 2006;113:1377–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01097.x doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01097.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  189. Resende A, Oliveira R, Botelho F, Silva C, Dinis P, Cruz F. 770 Mid-term follow-up of a randomized trial comparing TVT-O, TVT-Secur and MiniArc. European Urol Supp 2011;10:244. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1569-9056(11)60757-4 doi: 10.1016/S1569-9056(11)60757-4. [DOI]
  190. Enzelsberger H, Cemer I, Kostersitz E. Ophira (Minisling) versus Monarc (TOT) – a prospective randomized study for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence at a follow-up of 20 months. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2011;22:S1835–S6.
  191. Dati S, Rombolá P, Cappello S, Piccione E. M432 Single-incision minisling (Ajust) vs. obturator tension-free vaginal shortened tape (TVT-AbbrevO) in surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2012;119:S670. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7292(12)61622-1 doi: 10.1016/S0020-7292(12)61622-1. [DOI]
  192. Schweitzer KJ, Milani AL, van Eijndhoven HWF, Gietelink DA, Hallensleben E, Cromheecke GJ, van der Vaart CH. Postoperative pain after adjustable single-incision or transobturator sling for incontinence: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2015;125:27–34. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000000604 doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000604. [DOI] [PubMed]
  193. Pastore AL, Palleschi G, Al Salhi Y, Riganelli L, Fuschi A, Autieri D, et al. Evaluation of sexual function and quality of life in women treated for stress urinary incontinence: tension-free transobturator suburethral tape versus single-incision sling. J Womens Health 2016;25:355–9. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2015.5416 doi: 10.1089/jwh.2015.5416. [DOI] [PubMed]
  194. Fernandez-Gonzalez S, Martinez Franco E, Lin Miao X, Amat Tardiu L. Contasure-Needleless® compared with Monarc® for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J 2017;28:1077–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3231-1 doi: 10.1007/s00192-016-3231-1. [DOI] [PubMed]
  195. Gul M. A randomized prospective comparison of single incision mini-sling with transobrutator tape in women with stress urinary incontinence: 12 months follow-up results. J Endourol 2018;32:A28–A9.
  196. Gopinath D, Smith AR, Holland C, Reid FM. Why don’t women participate? A qualitative study on non-participation in a surgical randomised controlled trial. Int Urogynecol J 2013;24:969–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-1967-9 doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-1967-9. [DOI] [PubMed]
  197. Fernandez S, Martinez-Franco E, Lin X. Contasure-Needleless compared with Monarc for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2015;26:S84–S5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2475-x doi: 10.1007/s00192-014-2475-x. [DOI]
  198. Abdel-Fattah M, Sivanesan K, Ramsay I, Pringle S, Bjornsson S. How common are tape erosions? A comparison of two versions of the transobturator tension-free vaginal tape procedure. BJU Int 2006;98:594–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06348.x doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06348.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  199. Shah HN, Badlani GH. Mesh complications in female pelvic floor reconstructive surgery and their management: a systematic review. Indian J Urol 2012;28:129–53. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.98453 doi: 10.4103/0970-1591.98453. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  200. Dogan O, Kaya AE, Pulatoglu C, Basbug A, Yassa M. A randomized comparison of a single-incision needleless (Contasure-Needleless®) mini-sling versus an inside-out transobturator (Contasure-KIM®) mid-urethral sling in women with stress urinary incontinence: 24-month follow-up results. Int Urogynecol J 2018;29:1387–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-018-3624-4 doi: 10.1007/s00192-018-3624-4. [DOI] [PubMed]
  201. Van Rensburg JA, Jeffery ST, Sand Enbergh HA, Juul L, Steyn DW. Single incision-needleless and inside out TVT-O: a multicentre clinical equivalent randomised trial with preliminary 6 months and 1 year outcome for stress urine continence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2015;26:S136–S7.
  202. Lee J, Rosamilia A, Lim Y, Thomas E, Murray C, Leitch A, et al. MiniArc Monarc suburethral sling in women with stress urinary incontinence – an RCT – 60M follow up. Int Urogynecol J 2017;28:S80–S1.
  203. World Health Organization. The World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL). URL: www.who.int/publications-detail-redirect/WHO-HIS-HSI-Rev.2012.03 (accessed 1 April 2021).
  204. Kelleher CJ, Cardozo LD, Khullar V, Salvatore S. A new questionnaire to assess the quality of life of urinary incontinent women. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997;104:1374–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb11006.x doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb11006.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  205. Wagner TH, Patrick DL, Bavendam TG, Martin ML, Buesching DP. Quality of life of persons with urinary incontinence: development of a new measure. Urology 1996;47:67–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(99)80384-7 doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(99)80384-7. [DOI] [PubMed]
  206. Shumaker SA, Wyman JF, Uebersax JS, McClish D, Fantl JA. Health-related quality of life measures for women with urinary incontinence: the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire and the Urogenital Distress Inventory. Continence Program in Women (CPW) Research Group. Qual Life Res 1994;3:291–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00451721 doi: 10.1007/BF00451721. [DOI] [PubMed]
  207. Duralde ER, Rowen TS. Urinary incontinence and associated female sexual dysfunction. Sex Med Rev 2017;5:470–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sxmr.2017.07.001 doi: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2017.07.001. [DOI] [PubMed]
  208. Horosz E, Zwierzchowska A, Pomian A, Majkusiak W, Tomasik P, Barcz E. Impact of midurethral sling implantation on sexual function in women with stress urinary incontinence. J Clin Med 2020;9:E1538. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9051538 doi: 10.3390/jcm9051538. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  209. Zyczynski HM, Rickey L, Dyer KY, Wilson T, Stoddard AM, Gormley EA, et al. Sexual activity and function in women more than 2 years after midurethral sling placement. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012;207:421.e1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2012.06.053 doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.06.053. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  210. Naumann G, Steetskamp J, Meyer M, Laterza R, Skala C, Albrich S, Koelbl H. Sexual function and quality of life following retropubic TVT and single-incision sling in women with stress urinary incontinence: results of a prospective study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2013;287:959–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-012-2669-8 doi: 10.1007/s00404-012-2669-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  211. Glavind K, Larsen T, Lindquist AS. Sexual function in women before and after tension-free vaginal tape operation for stress urinary incontinence. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2014;93:986–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.12475 doi: 10.1111/aogs.12475. [DOI] [PubMed]
  212. Marszalek M, Roehlich M, Racz U, Metzenbauer M, Ponholzer A, Rauchenwald M, Madersbacher S. Sexual function after tension-free vaginal tape procedure. Urol Int 2007;78:126–9. https://doi.org/10.1159/000098069 doi: 10.1159/000098069. [DOI] [PubMed]
  213. Mazouni C, Karsenty G, Bretelle F, Bladou F, Gamerre M, Serment G. Urinary complications and sexual function after the tension-free vaginal tape procedure. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2004;83:955–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0001-6349.2004.00524.x doi: 10.1111/j.0001-6349.2004.00524.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  214. Kenton K, Stoddard AM, Zyczynski H, Albo M, Rickey L, Norton P, et al. 5-year longitudinal followup after retropubic and transobturator mid urethral slings. J Urol 2015;193:203–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.08.089 doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.08.089. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  215. Rogers RG, Coates KW, Kammerer-Doak D, Khalsa S, Qualls C. A short form of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12). Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2003;14:164–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-003-1063-2 doi: 10.1007/s00192-003-1063-2. [DOI] [PubMed]
  216. Rogers RG, Rockwood TH, Constantine ML, Thakar R, Kammerer-Doak DN, Pauls RN, et al. A new measure of sexual function in women with pelvic floor disorders (PFD): the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire, IUGA-Revised (PISQ-IR). Int Urogynecol J 2013;24:1091–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-2020-8 doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-2020-8. [DOI] [PubMed]
  217. Fu Q, Lv J, Fang W, Jiang C, Gu Y, Leng J, et al. The clinical efficacy of needleless sling technique and TOT in the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Int J Clin Exp Med 2017;10:7084–90.
  218. Merali S, Dolhaniuk C, Unger T. Stress incontinence in women; a pilot study comparing the MiniArc single incision sling system to the Monarc transobturator sling system. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2012;19:S33–S4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2012.08.104 doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2012.08.104. [DOI]
  219. Latthe PM, Foon R, Toozs-Hobson P. Transobturator and retropubic tape procedures in stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness and complications. BJOG 2007;114:522–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01268.x doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01268.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  220. Ford AA, Rogerson L, Cody JD, Aluko P, Ogah JA. Mid-urethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;7:CD006375. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006375.pub4 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006375.pub4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  221. Keršič M, Keršič M, Kunič T, Garzon S, Laganá AS, Barbič M, et al. Single-incision mini-sling for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: is it actually inferior to transobturator vaginal tape and tension-free vaginal tape? Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther 2020;9:123–30. https://doi.org/10.4103/GMIT.GMIT_78_19 doi: 10.4103/GMIT.GMIT_78_19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  222. Karakeçi A, Eftal TC, Keleş A, Gölbaşı C, Onur R. Single-incision midurethral sling shows less pain and similar success rate in a short-term follow-up compared to the transobturator tape method in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Turk J Urol 2020;46:63–8. https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2019.19105 doi: 10.5152/tud.2019.19105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  223. Erickson T, Roovers JP, Gheiler E, Parekh M, Parva M, Hanson C, et al. A multicenter prospective study evaluating efficacy and safety of a single-incision sling procedure for stress urinary incontinence. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2021;28:93–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2020.04.014 doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2020.04.014. [DOI] [PubMed]
  224. White AB, Kahn BS, Gonzalez RR, Rosamilia A, Anger JT, Eilber KS, Schaffer JI. Prospective study of a single-incision sling versus a transobturator sling in women with stress urinary incontinence: 3-year results. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2020;223:545.e1–545.e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2020.03.008 doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.03.008. [DOI] [PubMed]
  225. Kocjancic E, Tu LM, Erickson T, Gheiler E, Van Drie D. The safety and efficacy of a new adjustable single incision sling for female stress urinary incontinence. J Urol 2014;192:1477–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.05.101 doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.05.101. [DOI] [PubMed]
  226. Subak LL, Brown JS, Kraus SR, Brubaker L, Lin F, Richter HE, et al. The ‘costs’ of urinary incontinence for women. Obstet Gynecol 2006;107:908–16. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000206213.48334.09 doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000206213.48334.09. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  227. Campbell and Cochrane Economics Methods Group, Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Coordinating Centre. CCEMG – EPPI-Centre Cost Converter. URL: https://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/costconversion/default.aspx (accessed 15 March 2021).

RESOURCES