title: Retropubic versus transobturator midurethral synthetic slings: does one sling fit all?
abstract: The purpose of this article is to evaluate the recent evidence base for the choice between transobturator and retropubic approaches to midurethral slings used to treat stress urinary incontinence. While the retropubic and transobturator approaches to midurethral sling surgery for stress urinary incontinence demonstrate equivalent efficacy across a number of randomized controlled trials, they do not appear to be equivalent when particular patient populations are considered separately. The retropubic approach appears to be a better option in patients with intrinsic sphincter deficiency and limited urethral mobility.
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, 1685 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI 53705, USA. mcachran@urology.wisc.edu
authors.forename: Sarah E
authors.initials: SE
authors.lastname: McAchran
mesh_terms: D000367:Age Factors; D015992:Body Mass Index; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D017698:Postmenopause; D012086:Reoperation; D012307:Risk Factors; D012723:Sex; D053825:Suburethral Slings / Q000145:classification; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014521:Urethra / Q000503:physiopathology; D014550:Urinary Incontinence, Stress / Q000209:etiology / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000601:surgery*; D013520:Urologic Surgical Procedures / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*