Impact of Sling at Time of Prolapse Surgery on Overactive Bladder.

Importance: Prolapse surgery and sling surgery both lead to improvement in overactive bladder. However, less is known regarding how slings performed concurrently with less is know about how overactive bladder symptoms change in patients having prolapse surgery with a sling compared to prolapse surgery without a sling.

Objective: The primary aim was to compare change in postoperative overactive bladder symptoms in patients with preoperative overactive bladder who underwent sling placement versus no sling with prolapse surgery.

Study design: This was a secondary analysis of a cohort study evaluating overactive bladder in patients undergoing prolapse surgery. Sling procedures were performed concomitantly for treatment or prevention of stress incontinence. Baseline and 3-month follow-up urinary symptoms were assessed with the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire Short Form (OAB-q SF) and Urinary Distress Inventory-6 (UDI-6).

Results: Of patients with overactive bladder, 26 (40.0%) underwent midurethral sling (MUS) placement and 39 (60.0%) no sling. Preoperative OAB-q SF bother (score [SD], 46.8 [20.2] vs 40.2 [22.1]; P = 0.23) was similar between groups, but UDI-6 scores (59.2 [28.8] vs 43.8 [29.1]; P = 0.04) were higher in the sling group. At 3 months, the change (improvement) in OABq-SF bother (-16.9 [24.1] vs -22.4 [23.0]; P = 0.36), OABq-SF health-related quality of life (22.8 [28.6] vs 22.9 [23.9]; P = 0.99), and UDI-6 (-38.8 [32.9] vs -34.0 [27.8]; P = 0.53) were similar in the MUS and no MUS groups.

Conclusion: Patients with prolapse and overactive bladder undergoing prolapse surgery with a sling had similar improvements in OAB-q SF bother scores compared with those who did not have a sling.