medigraphic.com
ISSN 0187-5337 (Print)
Instituto Nacional de Perinatología

2003, Number 2

<< Back

Perinatol Reprod Hum 2003; 17 (2)

Tratamiento quirúrgico de la deficiencia intrínseca del esfínter uretral: revisión de la literatura y presentación de dos ejemplos

Martínez-Moreno F, Kundhart-Rasch J, Velázquez-Sánchez MP

Language: Spanish
References: 38
Page: 115-125
PDF size: 487.75 Kb.


ABSTRACT

There are reports of the processing surgical of the incontinence urinary since the principle of the century XX, the main advance has been the criterion of selection of each patient one for each one of the procedures. The surgery cannot be limited to the urethra and to the bladder, should be had in mind the equilibrium of strengths that exercise in the pelvis female. Therefore it is necessary to carry out a classification detailed of the prolapse of organs pelvic, quantify the defects of fascia endopelvic and to carry out a diagnostic precise of the type of classification urinary that itself this undertaking. The clinical that is dedicated to treat women with incontinence urinary knows that the restoring to health has a subjective appraisal but that objective; in conclusion the purpose of the processing is that of creating a sufficient resistance at the outset to prevent it lost of urine until arrive at an acceptable moment since the social point of view. Subsequently a revision of the different processing is carried out surgical of the deficiency intrinsic of the sphincter urethral, as well as the presentation of two examples of the National Institute of Perinatology.


REFERENCES

  1. Bates P, Bradley WE, Griffiths D, Melchor H, Rowan D, Sterling AM, Zinner N, Hald T. Standarization of terminology of lower urinary tract function. Urology 1977; 9: 237.

  2. Thomas TM, Plymat KR, Blannin J, Meade TW. Prevalence of urinary incontinence. Br J Med Clinic 1980; 281(6250): 1243-5.

  3. Jolleys JV. Reported prevalence of urinary incontinence in women in a general practice. Br J Med Clinic 1988; 296(6632): 1300-2.

  4. Wilson PD, Herbison RM, Herbison GP. Obstetric practice and the prevalence of urinary incontinence three months after delivery. Br J Obst Gynecol 1996; 103(2): 154-61.

  5. Herbertsson G, Losif CS. Surgical results and urodynamic studies 10 years after retropubic colpourethrocystopexy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1993; 72: 298-301.

  6. Bump RC, Cundiff GW. Disfunción del piso pélvico. Urol Clin North Am 1989; 16: 548-65.

  7. Colombo M, Vitobello D, Proietti F, Milani R. Randomised comparison of Burch colposuspension versus anterior colporrhaphy in women stress urinary incontinence and anterior vaginal wall prolapse. Br J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 107: 544-51.

  8. Cardozo L. Genuine stress incontinence: Urogynecology. 1st. Ed. New York, USA: Churchil Livingstone; 1997, p. 256-60.

  9. Henrikson L, Ulmsten U. A urodinamyc evaluation of the effects of abdominal urethrocystopexy and vaginal sling uretrhoplasty in women with stress incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1978; 131: 77-82.

  10. 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.

  11. Culligan PJ, Winkler HA, Blackhurst DW, Sand PK. A prospective randomized study of modified Burch retro pubic urethropexy and suburetral sling for genuine stress incontinence and low-pressure urethra. Neurourol Urodyn 1998; 17(4): 133.

  12. Bump RC, Cundiff GW. Uroginecología y disfunción del piso pélvico. Gynecol Obstet Clin North Am 1998; 4: 641-50.

  13. Blaivas JG, Olsson CA. Stress incontinence: classification and surgical approach. J Urol 1988; 139: 727-31.

  14. Blaivas JG, Olison CA. Stress incontinence: classification and surgical aproach. J Urol 1988; 139: 727.

  15. McGuire EJ, Fitzpatrick CC, Wan J. Clinical assessment of urethral sphincter function. J Urol 1993; 150: 1452-4.

  16. O’Connell H, McGuire E. Evaluation of female urinary incontinence. Medscape Women’s Health 1996; 1: 3.

  17. Haylen BT, Sutherst JR, Frazer MI. Is the investigation of most stress incontinence really necesary? Br J Urol 1989; 64: 147.

  18. McCormack M, Pike J, Kiruluta G. Leak point of incontinence: a measure of the interaction between outlet resistance and bladder capacity. J Urol 1993; 150: 162-4.

  19. Wan J, McGuire EJ, Bloom DA, Ritchey ML. Stress leak point pressure: a diagnostic tool for incontinent children. J Urol 1993; 150: 700-2.

  20. Swift SE, Ostergard DR. A comparison of stress leak point pressure and maximal urethral closure pressure in patients with genuine stress incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 85: 704-8.

  21. Sand PK, Bowen LW, Panganiban R. The low pressure urethra as a factor and failed retropubic urethropexy. Obstet Gynecol 1987; 69: 399.

  22. Cervigni, M. Natale, F. Surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Eur J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 85: 63-70.

  23. Colombo M, Scalambrino S, Maggioni A, Milani R. Burch colposuspension versus modified Marshall-Marchetti-Krantz. Urethropexy for primary genuine stress urinary incontinence: a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 171: 1573-9.

  24. Bergman A, Koonongs P, Ballard C. Primary stress urinary incontinence and pelvic relaxation: Prospective randomized comparison of three different operations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989; 161: 97-101.

  25. Bergman A, Giovanni E. Three surgical procedures for genuine stress incontinence: five-years follow-up of a prospective randomized study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 173: 66-71.

  26. Kholehede P, Noren B. Prediction of genital prolapse after Burch colposuspension. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1996; 75: 849-54.

  27. Wiskind AK, Creighton SM, Stanton SL. The incidence of genital prolapse after the Burch colposuspension. AmJ Obstet Gynecol 1992; 167: 399-405.

  28. Stanton SL, Cardozo LD. A comparison of vaginal and suprapubic surgery in the correction of incontinence due to urethral correction of incompetence. Br J Urol 1979; 51:497.

  29. Van Geelen JM, Theeuwes AGM, Eskes TKAB, Martin CB. The clinical and urodynamic effects of anterior vaginal repair and Burch colposuspension. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1988; 159: 137.

  30. Weil A, Reyes H, Bischoff P, et al. Modification of the urethral rest and stress profiles after different types of surgery for urinary stress incontinence. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1984; 91: 46.

  31. Bergman A, Ballard CA, Koonings PP. Comparison of three different surgical procedures for genuine stress incontinence: prospective randomized study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989; 160: 1102.

  32. Mundy AR. A trial comparing the Stamey bladder neck suspension procedure with colposuspension for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Br J Urol 1983; 55: 687.

  33. Stamey TA. Endoscopic suspension of the vesical neck for the urinary incontinence in females. Report on 203 consecutive patients. Ann Surg 1980; 192: 465-71.

  34. Walker GT, Texter JH. Succes and patient satisfaction following the Stamey procedure for stress urinary incontinence. J Urol 1992; 147: 1521-3.

  35. Karram MM, Angel O, Koonings PP, Tabor B, Bergman A, Bhatia N. The modified Pereyra procedure: a clinical and urodynamic review. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 99: 655-8.

  36. Stanton SL, Cardozo L. Results of colposuspension operation for incontinence and prolapse. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1979; 86: 693-7.

  37. Alcalay M, Monga A, Stanton SL. Burch colposuspension: a 10-20 year follow-up. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 102: 740-5.

  38. Peattie AB, Stanton SL. The Stamey operation for correction of genuine stress incontinence in the elderly women. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1989; 96: 983-6.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com