Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_190_библиотеки_им_акад_М_И_Перельмана
.pdf
Laparoscopic Burch Colposuspension — 377
https://t.me/med1917
45. Flax S. The gasless laparoscopic Burch bladder neck suspension:
early experience. JUrol. 1996;156(3):1105–1107.
46. Lobel R, Davis G. Long-term results of laparoscopic Burch urethropexy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 1997;4:341–345.
47. Speights SE, Moore RD, Miklos JR. Frequency of lower urinary
tract injury at laparoscopic Burch and paravaginal repair. JAm
Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2000;7(4):515–518.
48. Harris R, Cundiff GW, Theofrastous JP, Yoon H, Bump RC,
Addison WA. The value of intraoperative cystoscopy in urogynecologic and reconstructive pelvic surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol.
1997;177:1367–1371.
49. Soulie M, Salomon L, Seguin P, et al. Multi-institutional study of
complications in 1085 laparoscopic urologic procedures. Urology.
2001;58(6):899–903.
50. Aslan P, Woo H. Ureteric injury following laparoscopic colposuspension. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104:266–268.
51. Dietz HP, Wilson PD, Samalia KP, Walton J, Fentiman G.
Uretericinjuryfollowinglaparoscopic colposuspension.BrJObstet
Gynaecol. 1997;104(10):1217.
52. Dwyer PL, Carey MP, Rosamilia A. Suture injury to the urinary
tract in urethral suspensionprocedures for stress incontinence.Int
Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 1999;10(1):15–21.
53. Lawton V, Smith AR. Laparoscopic colposuspension. Semin
Laparosc Surg. 1999;6(2):90–99.
54. Fatthy H, El Hao M, Samaha I, Abdallah K. Modified Burch
colposuspension: laparoscopy versus laparotomy. J Am Assoc
Gynecol Laparosc. 2001;8(1):99–106.
55. Lavin JM, Foote AJ, Hosker GI, Smith AR. Laparoscopic Burch
colposuspension: a minimum of 2 year’sfollowupandcomparison
with open colposuspension. Gynaecol Endosc. 1998;7:251–258.
56. Bergman A, BallardCA, Koonings PP. Comparison of three different surgical procedures for genuine stress incontinence: prospective randomized study. Obstet Gynecol. 1989;160:1102–1106.
57. Wang AC. Burch colposuspension vs. Stamey bladder neck suspension. A comparison of complications with special emphasis
on detrusor instability and voiding dysfunction. JReprodMed.
1996;41(7):529–533.
58. Jarvis GJ. Surgery for genuine stress incontinence. Br J Obstet
Gynaecol. 1994;101(5):371–374.
59. Su T, Wang KG, Hsu CY, Wei HJ, Hong BK. 1997. Pospective
comparison of laparoscopic and traditional colposuspensions in
the treatment of genuine stress incontinence. Acta Obstet Gynecol
Scand. 1997;76:576–582.
60. Polascik TJ, Moore RG, Rosenberg MT, Kavoussi LR. Comparison
of laparoscopic and open retropubic urethropexy for treatment of
stress urinary incontinence. Urology. 1995;45(4):647–652.
61. Kohli N, Jacobs PA, Sze EH, Roat TW, Karram MM. Open compared with laparoscopicapproachtoBurch colposuspension:a cost
analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;90(3):411–415.
62. Hashizume M, Sugimachi K. Needle and trocar injury during
laparoscopic surgery in Japan. Surg Endosc. 1997;11:1198–1201.
63. Hurd W, Pearl ML, DeLancey JO, Quint EH, Garnett B, Bude RO.
Laparoscopic injury of abdominal wall blood vessels: a report of
three cases. Obstet Gynecol. 1993;82S:673–676.
64. Boike G, MillerCF, Spirtos NM. Incisional bowel herniations after
operative laparoscopy: a series of nineteen cases and review of the
literature. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;172:1726.
65. Margossian H, Pollard RR, Walters MD. Small bowel obstruction
in a peritoneal defect after laparoscopic Burch procedure. JAm
Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 1999;6(3):343–345.
66. Cheon W, Mak JH, LiuJY.Prospective randomisedcontrolledtrial
comparing laparoscopic and open colposuspension. Hong Kong
Med J . 2003;9(1):10–14.
67. Burton G. A randomized comparison of laparoscopic and open
colposuspension. Neurourol Urodyn
68. Burton G. A three yearprospectiverandomized urodynamic study
comparing open and laparoscopic colposuspension. Neurourol
Urodyn. 1997;16:353–354.
69. Carey MR, Maher C, Cronish A, et al. Laparoscopic versus
open colposuspension: a prospective multicentre randomised
single-blind comparison. Neurourol Urodyn. 2000;19:389–
390.
70. Summitt RL,Lucente V, Karram MM, Shull BL, Bent AE. Randomized comparison of laparoscopic and transabdominal Burch urethropexy for the treatment of genuine stress incontinence. Obstet
Gynecol. 2000;95(4):S2.
71. Huang WC, Yang JM. Anatomic comparison betweenlaparoscopic
and open Burch colposuspension for primary stress urinary incontinence. Urology. 2004;63(4):676–681.
72. Miannay E, Cosson M, Lanvin D, Querleu D, Crepin G. Comparison of openretropubicandlaparoscopic colposuspensionfor treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod
Biol. 1998;79:159–166.
73. Kung RC,Lie K,Lee P,Drutz HP.The cost-effectiveness oflaparoscopic versus abdominalBurchproceduresin women withurinary
stress incontinence. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 1996;3(4):537–
544.
74. Ulmsten U, Henriksson L, Johnson P, Varhos G. An ambulatory
surgical procedure under local anesthesia for treatment of female
urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J. 1996;7:81–86.
75. Persson J, Teleman P, Eten-Bergquist C, Wolner-Hanssen P.
Cost-analyzes based on a prospective, randomized study comparing laparoscopic colposuspension with a tension-free vaginal
tape procedure. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002;81(11):1066–
1973.
76. Ustun Y, Engin-Ustun Y, GungorM,Tezcan S. Tension-freevaginal
tape compared with laparoscopic Burch urethropexy. J Am Assoc
Gynecol Laparosc. 2003;10(3):386–389.
77. Paraiso M, Walters MD, Karram MM, Barber MD. Laparoscopic
Burchcolposuspensionversus tension-freevaginaltape:arandomized trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(6):1249–1258.
78. Valpas A, Kivela A, Penttinen J,et al. Tension-free vaginal tape and
laparoscopic mesh colposuspension in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence: immediate outcome and complications – a randomized clinical trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2003;82(7):665–
671.
79. Debodinance P, Cosson M. Prolapse in the young woman: study
of risk factors. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2002;31(3):320–321.
. 1993;13:497–498.

Section 14.2. Minimally Invasive Slings
https://t.me/med1917
Alan D. Garely and Cedric K. Olivera
More than 10 million women in the United States suffer from
stressurinary incontinence.[1] Leakage ofurine during coughing,
laughing, or sneezing is the most common complaint. It is estimated that stress incontinence and other types of urinary incontinence cost over$9 billion per year in health carespending.[2–4]
These costs include medical and surgical therapy but also paper
products for adult diapers and nursing home care.
Stress incontinence is a disease that affects quality of life.
This means that activities of daily living (shopping, working,
and socializing) may be curtailed, which ultimately can affect the
patient’s psychological well-being. Depression is common, and
afflicted individuals often isolate themselves to avoid embarrassing situations.[5–7] Nobody likes to smell like urine or to be
around others who smell bad. Coupling this with injuries that
occur from falls while trying to rush to the bathroom, especially
at night, many of these people end up in nursing homes.
Significant improvement has been made in treating overactive bladder conditions with new anticholinergic medications.
Stress incontinence has also seen tremendous improvements in
treatment since theadventofthe tension-free vaginal tape(TVT).
Although the TVT was the first sling of its type, other approaches
and methods have continued this momentum, making stress
incontinence treatment a safe, quick, and outpatient procedure.
This section discusses the pathophysiology, work-up, and
treatment of stress incontinence. Unless specified, the term min-
imally invasive sling (MIS) is used to discuss all the minimally
invasive slings, regardless of brand or approach.
ANATOMY OF STRESS INCONTINENCE
The vagina receives its support in three dimensions (Figures
14.2.1, 14.2.2). The roof of the vagina (anterior wall) supports
the bladder and the urethra. Distally, the connective tissue anterior to the vaginal epithelium attaches to the pubic bone. Laterally, the tissue (commonly called the pubocervical fascia) is
attached to the arcus tendineus fascia via the fascia endopelvina. This arcus tendineus runs from the pubic symphysis to the
ischial spine bilaterally. The obturator internus muscle and the
iliococcygeus muscle (part of the levator ani) are separated by
the arcus tendineus (Figures 14.2.3, 14.2.4). Anterior wall defects
are called cystoceles and may be further divided into central and
lateral defects.
If the anterior vaginal wall connective tissue separates from
the arcus tendineus fascia on either one or both sides, this is considered a lateral or paravaginal defect. If the lateral attachments
are well supported but a “drop” in the anterior wall is seen, this
is a central or midline defect (Figure 14.2.5).
The apex of the vagina is supported by the cardinal ligament
and the uterosacral ligaments. The cardinal ligament runs across
the pelvis from ischial spine to ischial spine, and lends support
by encircling the cervix. This forms a critical component of the
pericervical ring at the level of the ischial spines, along with the
pubocervical fascia, the pubourethral ligaments, the uterosacral
ligaments, and the rectovaginal septum. The cardinal ligament
bridges the pubocervical fascia to the posteriorrectovaginalfascia
(which serves a similar purpose on the posterior vaginal wall).
The uterosacral ligaments joinposteriorlyto the cervix andattach
to the sacrum.[8–10]
When the supportive tissue of the vaginal apex becomes
injured or attenuated, apical support decreases and the vagina
starts to invert like an inside-out pocket. This is called an enterocele. As the apex further descends toward the introitus, the anterior vaginal wallusually separates from thelateralarcustendineus
fascia, exacerbating the anterior wall cystocele.
Posteriorly, the vaginal connective tissue separates the rectal
wall from the vaginal epithelium. Like the anterior vaginal wall,
the posteriorconnective tissue is also attachedlaterally, butto the
arcus tendinous via thefascia endopelvina. Breaks or attenuation
of this tissue create a rectocele.
PHYSIOLOGY OF STRESS INCONTINENCE
In a normal anatomic pelvis at rest, the closure pressure of the
urethra (Pu) exceeds the intravesical pressure (Pves). This means
that the pressure inside the bladder is lower than the pressure
inside the urethra. As long as Pu is greater than or equal to Pves,
no leakage of urine should occur. It is very important for Pu
to be less than Pves when needed, or otherwise normal micturition cannot occur. Our problem begins when Pves is greater
than Pu at times in between voluntary voiding. This indicates
incontinence.
Assuming the patientisnot voiding intentionally,tomaintain
an intact continence mechanism, the Pu must always be greater
than Pves, even under events of stress (i.e., coughing, laughing,
and sneezing). In the perfectly intact pelvis, this means that the
intra-abdominal pressures are equally transmitted to both the
bladder and the urethra, thereby canceling out the momentary
rise in pressure. This can work only if the urethra is well supported. This is easy to picture by thinkingabout a garden hose on
a driveway. If water is running through the hose and you step on
it, the water will stop. If the same hose is placed on a trampoline,
which lacks support, it is unlikely that stepping on the hose will
stop the flow of water. Applying this principle to the urethra and
378

Figure 14.2.1. Frontal view showing vaginal support and surrounding
https://t.me/med1917
structures. (Permission granted by Gynecare.)
bladder neck, it becomes clear how a cystocele can increase the
risk of incontinence.[11–13]
Not all stress incontinence will occur in the presence of a cystocele, and not all cystoceles are accompanied with stress incontinence. The urethra itself has an intrinsic resting tone, which is
oftenhigh enough to compensateforlackofanteriorwallsupport.
The converse of this occurs in patients with stress incontinence
in whom the anterior vaginal wall support is excellent. In these
cases, the intrinsic resting tone of the urethra is poor, despite a
solid “backboard” (Figure 14.2.6).
The three factors known to increase the risk of developing
stress incontinence are age, genetic predisposition to weak connective tissue (hernia formation), and a history of vaginal childbirth. Looking at each of these individually, we can see how they
influence the continence mechanism.
As the pelvic floor ages, even intact support may begin to
weaken. This is probably why stress incontinence increases with
age. Factors such as decreased estrogen may contribute, but the
studies are not conclusive and are often contradictory.
Minimally Invasive Slings — 379
Figure 14.2.3. Arcus tendineus fascia pelvis (the white line). (Permission granted by Gynecare.)
For reasons not completely understood, certain ethnicities
appear to be at a higher risk of incontinence secondary to
connective tissue strength. Although studies are ongoing, this
increased risk is most likely related to collagen composition
and deposition. Populations from northern Europe seem predisposed, whereas prevalence in African-based populations is
lower.
Vaginal deliveries cause both stretching and crushing of the
pelvic floor tissues, muscles, and nerves. Some women recover
without any sequelae. Like a rubber band stretched to its limits,
the pelvic floor does not always “snap” back to its original position. If the injury involves nerves, the intrinsic resting tone of the
urethra may decrease. If it involves the muscles, a cystocele may
develop, decreasing anterior wall support.
EVOLUTION OF SURGICAL REPAIR
Figure 14.2.2. 3D model showing pubocervical fascia and anterior
vaginal wall support. (Permission granted by Gynecare.)
Before 1996, the approach to stress incontinence surgery was
determined more by specialty than by technique and outcome.
The gynecologists favored anterior repairs and retropubic urethropexies (MMK and Burch), whereas urologists chose needle
suspensions (Stamey, Raz, and Pereyra) and open slings.
Anterior Repair
Anterior repairs (Kelly plication) are done transvaginally at the
time of othervaginalsurgery and areoftencombinedwith vaginal
hysterectomy and posterior repairs. These procedures rarely are
performed with cystoscopy, as most gynecologists do not have
privileges to use the cystoscope. The anatomic basis of the anterior
repair is to plicate the connective tissue under the bladder and
urethra (just anterior to the vaginal epithelium). The vaginal
epithelium lying lateral to the plication is trimmed and closed
with a running or interrupted absorbable suture (Figure 14.2.7).
This pulls the tissue together under the midline of the anterior
vaginal wall. This increased tension under the bladder neck and

380 — Alan D. Garely and Cedric K. Olivera
https://t.me/med1917
Figure 14.2.4. Iliococcygeus and obturator internus muscle forming arcus tendineus fascia pelvis. (Permission
granted by Gynecare.)
urethra was thought to increase the urethral closure pressure,
decreasing stress incontinence.
Two problems with this approach were long-term success
rates and anatomic distortion of the vagina. Objective cure rates
with more than 2 years of follow-up ranged from 54% to79% [14–
16], with some studiesshowingfailureashighas80%. Because the
anterior vaginal wall is “pulled” together in the midline, the pubocervical fascia is also pulled off of its lateral attachment from the
arcus tendineus fascia. Detaching tissue from thearcus tendineus
causes the most common anterior wall defect, called a lateral cystocele. It is probably not a coincidence that cystoceles are associated with stress incontinence, as the bladder neck and urethra
lose support. The anterior repair has a place in repairing central
cystoceles, but its use in stress incontinence is not supported by
the data.
Retropubic Urethropexies
Retropubic urethropexies are based on the concept of urethral
stabilization. Suture is placed next to the urethra starting at the
bladder neck and is often followed by additional sutures lateral to the urethra. These sutures are then placed through the
periosteum of the symphysis (MMK) or through Cooper’s ligament (Burch). The suture tension is tied so that the bladder
neck rests with little elevation. This is done by creating a “suture
bridge” effect with the suture. The physiologic goal is to “fool”
the urethra into behaving as if it were at rest during stress events
(Figure 14.2.8).
In properly selected cases,successrates should begreaterthan
80% at 5 years. Although success rates are similar for the MMK
and Burch, the MMK is rarely associated with osteitis pubis, an
often debilitating and chronic disorder.Retropubic urethropexies
require dissection of the space of Retzius (retropubic space). This
Figure 14.2.5. Central anterior wall defect known as a cystocele. (Permission granted by Gynecare.)

Minimally Invasive Slings — 381
https://t.me/med1917
Figure 14.2.6. Sling providing “backboard” support under urethra.
(Permission granted by AMS.)
area frequently has a vast plexus of superficialveins that may cause
a rapid and profound blood loss. Unless this area is approached
laparoscopically, an abdominal incision is required.
Stress incontinence can be objectively graded ona continuum
ranging from mild to severe by looking at urethral closure pressures or leak pointpressures.Thelowerthe pressure, the lower the
intrinsic resting tone of the urethra. We know that stress incontinence with an objective assessment of good intrinsic urethral
resting tone (higher pressure) will respond well to a retropubic
urethropexy. Cases with poor urethral tone are associated with
higher failure rates and should probably be treated with a sling.
Urethra
Bladder
neck
Figure 14.2.8. Retropubic urethropexy (Burch). (Permission granted
by AMS.)
Failures in this group occur because there is a lack of support
directly under the urethra. Lateral support is just not enough to
coapt the urethra during stress events.
Although cystoscopy has not been the standard of care with
retropubic urethropexies,recentstudies have shown urinary tract
injury rates as high as 4.9%.[17–19] These injuries include placement of sutures into the bladder and urethra and kinking of the
ureters. Permanent suture in the bladder acts as a nidus for stone
formation. Given theseinjuries, cystoscopy shouldbe required to
assure decreased morbidity.
B
Pubocervical
fascia
Base of
bladder
A
Figure 14.2.7. Anterior colporrhaphy. (Permission granted by AMS.)

382 — Alan D. Garely and Cedric K. Olivera
https://t.me/med1917
Needle Suspensions
In the past, urologists have favored needle suspensions. Sutures
are placed next to the bladder neck and urethra (like a retropubic
urethropexy) and then anchored to the rectus fascia instead of
the pubic symphysis. Depending on the way the suture is secured
next to the bladder neck (whether with a pledget or just suture)
determines the name of the approach (Raz, Stamey, or Pereyra).
The sutures are pulled up to the rectus fascia with a “needle.”
The needle is a long, thin metal rod that is sharp enough to
puncture through the intervening layers between vagina and
rectus. This approach also requires an abdominal skin incision.
Overall success rates for needle suspensions are 81%.[20–22]
This rate islowerthan that ofretropubicsuspensions at 85%.[20–
22] The limitations for needle suspensions are similar to those
for the retropubic urethropexies, including the lack of direct suburethral support. Although the MMK and Burch are “fixed” to
immobile tissue, the needle suspensions are totally dependent
on mobile, distensible tissue. This contributes to failure on two
fronts. First, it gives two separate places for suture to pull or
rip out. Second, it gives two places for the soft tissue to stretch,
decreasing the ability to support the urethra.
Placement of the sutures with the needle is done blindly and
with a tactile feel for anatomic landmarks. Cystoscopy must be
performed after each pass of the needle to ensure urinary tract
integrity.
Open Slings
Before theadvent of the MIS, the traditional sling wasconsidered
the domain of the urologist or specially trained urogynecologist.
This “open” sling required opening the vaginal epitheliumunder
the bladder neck, cutting the abdomen, and placing a sling or
hammock under the bladder neck and urethra (Figure 14.2.9).
Although many materials were used for the sling, the most common material was autologous fascia or muscle. Fasciawas usually
taken from the upper thigh (fascia lata) or the abdomen (rectus
Figure 14.2.9. Sling underbladderneck. (Permission granted byAMS.)
fascia). The rectus muscle was used because of its proximity to
the vagina. The sling wasthen brought above the rectusfascia and
then tied either to the fascia or across the midline to the other
end of the sling.
Because the sling was tied down, the risk of urinary retention
was high. Traditional slings were also associated with infections
and blood loss because of the dissection needed to properly place
the sling. When certain nonabsorbable materials were used as the
sling substrate (mesh made of Prolene, Marlex, Gore-Tex, etc.),
erosion into the urethra and vagina was common. Muscle herniation was also notedin theupper thigh and abdomen, depending
on the site of fascial harvest.
Traditional slings may be used for treatment of the entire
range of stress incontinence, and success rates can exceed 85%.
This “take-all-comers” flexibility, along with a high success rate,
served as the impetus for developing a safer, easier, and faster
sling. This would also include making the sling “minimally
invasive.”
MINIMALLY INVASIVE SLINGS
The advent of the MIS was initially met with a high degree of
skepticism. Long-term success was unknown. Placing the sling
at the mid-urethra instead of the bladder neck was a new idea.
The choice of material was also controversial given the history
of urethral erosions with Prolene mesh. Medical “politics” also
contributed to doubts about the MIS. Urologists had been the
surgeons doing slings, but the MIS was developed by a gynecologist and was being taught to gynecologists. The rate-limiting step
of the procedure that kept it from most gynecologists was the
absolute need to do a cystoscopy during the case.
Westby andother authors [23–25] postulated thatwhenlooking at a urethral pressure profile, the mid-portion of the urethra
has the highest resting closure pressure. It is easier to augment
coaptation at the area that already has the highest intrinsic pressure. Anatomically, support of the mid-urethra causes less distortion and less “kinking” than does support at the distal meatus
or at the bladder neck.
By applying the principles of tension-free surgery, the sling is
placed under the urethra, with a spacer temporarily interposed
between sling and urethra. The sling is then pulled through the
intervening tissue and not tied or secured to any tissue. This is
the crucial step in the “tension-free” description.
Sincethe first TVT was introduced by Ulmsten,several similar
devices have come to market. The first generation of MIS was
based on retropubic placement. The main differences between
each proprietary sling are in the weave of the mesh, the type of
material used, and whether the sling is placed by pushing the
mesh from the vagina through the abdominal incisions or the
mesh is pulled up from the abdominal side.
The second-generation MIS used a transobturator approach
instead of passing through the retropubic space.[26–28] Again,
different proprietary products strive to achieve the same
result with variations on material and on direction of placement.
The third generation of MIS is readjustable. This allows the
sling to be tightened or loosened either during the surgery or at
any time after. All three types of sling are described in detail in
the following paragraphs.

Figure 14.2.10. First-generation TVT device. (Permission granted by
https://t.me/med1917
Gynecare.)
TENSION-FREE VAGINAL TAPE
In1998, Ulmstenet al. presented“A Multicenter Study of TensionFree Vaginal Tape (TVT) for Surgical Treatment of StressUrinary
Incontinence.”[29] It was noted by Ulmsten that “a long series of
experiments proceeding the current TVT operation have shown
that placing a sling under the midurethra without tension is the
best way to provide a dynamic kinking of the organ, and hence to
close the urethra in stress situations.”[30–32] This led to a patent
by Dr. Ulmsten and subsequent sale of the device to Johnson &
Johnson. The device is marketed under the name TVT (Figure
14.2.10).
Preoperative Evaluation
No patient should ever have a stress incontinence procedure
unless stress incontinence is visually witnessed. Without actually seeing the leakage, you run the risk of operating on a patient
who really has urge incontinence. If the patient does not have
stress incontinence,herurge incontinencesymptomsmayworsen
because of the obstruction placed on the urethra. Although bedside urodynamic evaluation done with a simple catheter and
syringe are usually reliable, complex testing should be done to
help aid in determining the final tensioning of the sling. Patients
with very low leak point pressures will probably need the sling
to abut the suburethral tissue, whereas patients with higher leak
point pressures can have the sling placed looser.
Slings work best when placed under the urethra in the presence of a well-supported anterior vaginal wall. Although it is
difficult to quantitate when a cystocele is too big, the surgeon
must be mindful that the anterior vaginal wall will not rotate
around the sling (which stabilizes the urethra) like a fulcrum,
contributing to urethral kinking and urinary retention. Proper
surgical planning may mean that the patient is not a candidate
for anisolated sling but may require a larger pelvic reconstructive
surgery.
Although slings may be considered minor outpatient procedures, they are still surgical procedures done with anesthesia and
associated risks. These operations should be taken seriously, with
Minimally Invasive Slings — 383
great attention paid to the patient’s medical history and medications. Proper planning will help ensure a safe and effective
operation.
Technique
When doing these cases for the first time, general anesthesia is
essential. This will keep the patient absolutely still, allowing the
surgeon to concentrate on the dissection and placement of the
sling. Even in the hands of an experienced surgeon, a moving
patient makes it hard to achieve an optimal outcome. After the
surgeon is comfortable with the procedure, a combination of
local anesthesia with sedation may be attempted if necessary.
The entire procedure should take less than an hour, and patients
recover rapidly with few side affects from general anesthesia. If
the sling is to be done with other gynecologic procedures, local
anesthesia with sedation may not be possible.
Local anesthesia with epinephrine is given to all patients
regardless of whether the procedure is done under general anesthesia or sedation. The epinephrine will greatly reduce blood loss
by causing vasoconstriction. The local component will decrease
pain sensation by numbing the pain receptors prior to incision.
Vasopressin may also be substituted for the epinephrine component to achieve hemostasis.
The patient is brought to the operating room and placed in the
dorsal lithotomyposition. Positioningthepatient’s buttock a little
lowerthanusualwillaidinvisualizationofthefieldand placement
of the sling. The patient is prepped and draped for combined
abdominal/vaginal approach surgery. The drape should also have
a cysto bag to help prevent a flood during the cystoscopy portion
of the procedure.
A preoperative dose of antibiotic should be given intravenously. A weighted speculum is placed in the vagina to expose
the anterior vaginal wall. A marking pen is used to make two 0.5cm marks5 cm apart, symmetric to the midline, at thelevel of the
pubic symphysis. Lidocaine with epinephrine or Marcaine with
epinephrine should be injected at the marked spots and into the
retropubic space along the pubic symphysis. The same anesthetic
should be injected under the urethra and lateral to the urethra
aiming at the ipsilateral shoulder. An 18F Foley catheter should
then be placed into the bladder and allowed to drain the urine.
Placing the catheter before injecting can inadvertently cause the
catheter balloon to pop, requiring a new Foley.
A #14 surgical knife should be used to make small puncture
incisions at the marked spots on the abdomen. The knife should
then be used to cut a 3-cm vertical incision under the urethra
starting just distal to the urethra vesical junction. Using a very
sharp plastic surgical Metzenbaum or tenotomy scissors, flaps
should be gently developed on the left and right sides of the midline incision. Injuries that occur with sharp dissection are almost
always easier to repair than those created with blunt dissection
or spreading. Care should be taken not to go too deep, as this
may cause immediate entry into the urethra or bladder, or may
contribute to delayed erosion in these structures. Superficial dissection may lead to cutting through the vaginal epithelium. This
is called a “button hole.” A button hole makes it easy to place the
sling through the inside of the flap, out into the vagina, and then
back into the flap. This will leave the patient with a small piece
of exposed mesh in the vagina. Dissection should stop short of
perforating into the retropubic space (Figure 14.2.11).

384 — Alan D. Garely and Cedric K. Olivera
https://t.me/med1917
Figure 14.2.11. Initial dissection of vagina for placement of a
midurethral sling. (Permission granted by AMS.)
The rigid catheter guide is placed into the Foley, and the
catheter is deflected to the same side that the first needle will be
passed. Assuming the first pass is on the left side, the Foley is
deflected to the left. Because of limited space, the catheter and
guide maybeclampedontothedrape at an angle slightly above the
horizontal plain of the urethra. The rigid catheter guide deflects
the uterovesical junction away from the TVT needle when it is
passed. This decreases the risk ofinjury to the urethra and bladder
(Figure 14.2.12).
The TVT device consists of two separate needles swedged
onto either end of a strip of Prolene mesh. This is covered by two
overlapping pieces ofa plasticsheath. The overlappingarea of the
two sheaths can be clamped with one click from a hemostat to
prevent early separation of the sheaths. This decreases the possibility that the mesh will twist or stretch. Other than aiding in
sling placement, the sheath protects the sling from exposure to
vaginal flora, thereby decreasing the risk of surgical infection in
the surrounding tissue (Figure 14.2.13).
Figure 14.2.13. TVT with sheath. (Permission granted by Gynecare.)
The TVT needle on one side is screwed tightly into the
reusable TVT handle. Using a toothed forceps, the cut vaginal
edge on the left side is lifted. Working in the left flap, the surgeon should use his or her left hand to hold the TVT handle and
position the tip of the needle into the flap. With the surgeon’s
right hand, two fingers should be placed into the vagina, outside the flap. The right hand should then cradle the curve of the
TVT needle, aiming it at a 45
◦
angle toward the left shoulder.
The tip should be adjacent to the pubic symphysis. The surgeon’s
left hand should be exerting gentle pressure while the right hand
guides the needle into the retropubic space (Figure 14.2.14).
Once the pubocervical fascia is perforated, a “give” should
be palpated and the pushing halted. This indicates that the TVT
needle tip is safely anterior and lateral to the urethra andbladder.
The angle of the TVT handle should then be corrected to aim
toward the patient’s head and not the shoulder. The tip can be
gently “walked” off the symphysis with a touch-and-push technique (Figure 14.2.15).
Figure 14.2.12. TVT Foley catheter guide. (Permission granted by
Gynecare.)
Figure 14.2.14. Placement of the TVT needle. (Permission granted by
Gynecare.)

Figure 14.2.15. TVT needle next to pubic bone. (Permission granted by AMS.)
https://t.me/med1917
Minimally Invasive Slings — 385
The surgeon shouldidentify his orher incision onthe left side
of the patient’s abdomen and aimfor that spot. With a littleeffort,
the TVT needle should be easily pushed through theincision and
the procedure halted. Therigid catheter guideshould be removed
and the Foley opened to drainage. Evaluation of urine color may
sometimes signal a bladder perforation. Even in the presence of
a perforation, the urine is often clear because the injuries are
small and do not always bleed. The bladder should be filled with
a least 300 mL of water, but more fluid is preferable as it is easy
to miss “in–out” injuries in the bladder that catch a small area of
tissue. A 70
◦
cystoscope should be used to visualize the bladder
and urethra. Most bladder injuries occur at the 10 and 2 o’clock
positions.[33–35] If an injury is detected, the needle should be
removed, the bladder emptied, and the entire procedure for that
side restarted. Gentle movement of the TVT handle should show
the TVT needle gliding in the tissue lateral to the bladder. If the
tissue moves with the needle, the placement is probably too close
to the bladder, and the needle should be removed and replaced.
If the needle was well placed, the bladder is emptied with the
Foley, and the TVT handle is unscrewed from the TVT needle.
The needle is pushed up, pulled through the abdominal incision,
and left to rest on the abdomen.
The rigid catheter guide is reinserted into the Foley, and the
same procedure is done on the right side, but with reversal of the
surgeon’s hands and displacement of the catheter guide to the
right side.
Once both needles are safely resting on the abdomen, the
surgeon or assistant can slowly pull up equally on both needles
until the sheath is about 2 cm from the urethra. The hemostat
may be removed, and a spacing device should be placed between
the sheath and urethra. The wide part of a closed Metzenbaum
or a #8 Hegar dilator may be used. The needles should be cut free
from the sheaths and mesh. The sheath on each side should be
grasped with a Kelly clamp. To avoid injury to the mesh, one arm
of the clamp is placed on the outside and one arm on the inside
of the sheath (Figure 14.2.16).
While the surgeon holds countertraction between the sheath
and the urethra, the Kelly clamps are pulled upward, causing the
sheaths to separate in the midline, leaving the mesh sitting under
the urethra with no “tension” (Figure 14.2.17).
The mesh is cut at the abdominal incisions, pulling up gently
on the mesh and pushing down with the suture scissors on the
skin. This ensures that the mesh does not irritate the incision
site. The mesh is inspected and palpated through the vaginal
incision to ensure that it is not too tight. The vaginal incision is
then closed with a 2-0 absorbable running, nonlocking suture.
The skin incisions can be closed with Dermabond (Ethicon, Inc.;
Figure 14.2.18).
Personal preference will determine how and when the Foley
catheter is removed. Some surgeonswill leave the operating room
with the Foley outand then wait up to4 hoursor until the patient
Figure 14.2.16. TVT sheaths grasped with Kelly clamps. (Permission
granted by Gynecare.)

386 — Alan D. Garely and Cedric K. Olivera
https://t.me/med1917
Figure 14.2.17. Midurethral placement oftension-freemesh. (Permission granted by Gynecare.)
feels the need to void (whichever comes first)to do apassivevoiding trial. If the patient is able to void, the bladder is catheterized
within 15 minutestocheckfor the postoperative residual. A residual less than 75 mL is usually considered acceptable.
Others will leave the Foley in place at the completion of the
case and then wait about 1 to 2 hours before doing an active
voiding trial. This involves filling the bladder with water through
the Foley until the patient feels full, or until at least 200 mL is
instilled. The catheter is removed, and the patient voids within
15 minutes into a graduated hat or cup. The voided amount is
subtracted from the instilled amount for the postvoid residual.
Experience has shown that the surgical assistants and recovery
room nurses who manage these patients prefer the active voiding
trial as it creates less work for them.
Variations
The SPARC device (American Medical Systems) is also a retropubic MIS but uses the “top-down” approach. Instead of pushing
Figure 14.2.19. SPARC system. (Permission granted by AMS.)
the mesh upthrough the abdominalincisions,the SPARC needles
are pushed down into the anterior vaginal wall incision and the
mesh is pulled up. Urologists who have experience with needle
suspensions often feel more comfortable with this approach than
through the vagina (Figure 14.2.19).
Numerous studies have shown that the SPARC has success
and complication rates similar to those for the TVT.[36,37] One
study showedalowersuccessrate,butthishasnot been duplicated
in other studies.[38] Because of the learning curve needed for
all these procedures, it is difficult to judge outcome unless the
surgeon has extensive experience with aspecific technique before
initiation of a study.
Figure 14.2.18. Sutureless closure of incision with glue. (Permission
granted by Gynecare.)
TRANSOBTURATOR TAPE
In 2001, an article was published by Delorme [26] that described
the next generationofsuburethral slings. Becauseofthe anatomic
position, this was called the transobturator urethral suspension or transobturator tape (TOT) procedure. The original
abstract states: “This tapehastwooriginal features: its non-woven
polypropylene structure is coated with silicone on the urethral
surface inorder to limitretraction ofpolypropylene and to establish a barrier to extension of periurethral fibrosis. Transmuscular
insertion, through the obturator and puborectalis muscles, reproducesthenaturalsuspensionfasciaoftheurethrawhilepreserving
the retropubic space”(Figures 14.2.20, 14.2.21).
The concept of avoiding the retropubic space was very appealing for many reasons. Most complications associated with the
TVT procedure (see below) would be decreased, if not eliminated. Going through the obturator fossa would be associated
with a new set of problems, but anatomically, none seemed as
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
