Early results of pubovaginal sling lysis by midline sling incision

Victor W. Nitti, Kevin V. Carlson, Jerry G. Blaivas, Roger R. Dmochowski

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

96 Scopus citations


Objectives. To describe a simplified technique and results of pubovaginal sling lysis by incision of the sling in the midline by way of a transvaginal approach. Methods. We reviewed the charts of 19 women who underwent pubovaginal sling lysis for obstruction. Patients presenting with retention, incomplete emptying or storage, or voiding symptoms suggesting obstruction after pubovaginal sling placement were evaluated with videourodynamic studies and cystourethroscopy. The diagnosis of obstruction was made on the basis of a combination of clinical, urodynamic, and endoscopic findings. All patients underwent a midline incision of the sling by way of a transvaginal approach without formal urethrolysis. Results. The mean patient age was 57 years. Fifteen women (79%) had an autologous rectus fascial sling, 3 (16%) an allographic fascia lata sling, and 1 (5%) a polypropylene sling. Twelve women (63%) presented with urinary retention and required catheterization to empty. The other 7 women presented with obstructive and/or irritative symptoms without the need to catheterize. The mean time to sling lysis was 10.6 months from the initial surgery. The mean follow-up was 12 months (range 1 to 55). Overall, sling lysis was successful in 84% of the women. Stress incontinence recurred in 17%. No significant perioperative complications occurred. Conclusions. Pubovaginal sling lysis without formal urethrolysis appears to be a safe and effective method of relieving obstruction. The success and recurrent stress incontinence rates are comparable to those with formal urethrolysis.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)47-51
Number of pages5
Issue number1
StatePublished - 2002
Externally publishedYes


Dive into the research topics of 'Early results of pubovaginal sling lysis by midline sling incision'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this