Comparison of the results of miniinvasive treatment of stress urinary incontinence using Ajust TM and MiniArc system
Abstract
The aim of the study was to compare the effectiveness of two minimally invasive surgical techniques for stress urinary incontinence in female patients (Ajust and MiniArc), using subjective assessment as well as evaluation of objective parameters. Methods: A total of sixty-six female patients with stress urinary incontinence were enrolled into the prospective, randomized, multicentre trial, mean age 57.8 years (range 42-88 years).
Patients in Group A had undergone surgery using Ajust method; patients in Group B underwent surgery using the MiniArc method. The subjective satisfaction of the patients along with the outcome of the procedure was evaluated using a standardized questionnaire "The International Consultation on Incontinence (ICI-Q)".
The objective assessment was performed with the use of cough test, urodynamics (bladder volume at the first desire to void - FDV, cytometric capacity - CC, maximum urethral closure pressure - MUCP, maximum urinary flow - Qmax), and ultrasound parameters (difference between the gamma-gammadif angles, distance between vesicourethral junction at rest and during the Valsalva maneuver - d). All of the parameters were measured prior to treatment, and three months following the surgical procedure.
Statistical evaluation was performed with the two-choice t-test and nonparametric two-choice Wilcoxons test, with the correction for sequence alignment. Conclusion: Our initial experience with the surgical techniques Ajust' and MiniArc, with respect to the effectiveness and possible per- or postoperative complications, are good.
From our assessment carried out at three-month follow-up after the surgery it is apparent that the effectiveness of both surgical procedures are comparable. However, further follow-up is necessary for a definitive assessment of both methods.