Comparison of laparoscopic and laparotomic Burch colposuspension in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence

Creative Commons License

Öztürk B., Atlıhan U., Peker M. E., MUNGAN M. U.

Journal of the Turkish German Gynecology Association, cilt.26, sa.3, ss.190-194, 2025 (ESCI) identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 26 Sayı: 3
  • Basım Tarihi: 2025
  • Doi Numarası: 10.4274/jtgga.galenos.2025.2025-4-7
  • Dergi Adı: Journal of the Turkish German Gynecology Association
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, CINAHL, TR DİZİN (ULAKBİM)
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.190-194
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Burch colposuspension, laparoscopy, laparotomy, stress urinary incontinence
  • Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Objective: To evaluate patients who underwent Burch colposuspension due to stress-type urinary incontinence (SUI) in terms of laparoscopic (L/S) and laparotomy (L/T) approaches. Material and Methods: Women aged 40-70 years who were admitted to our hospital with symptoms of SUI between 2017 and 2024, who underwent surgical treatment for SUI, and who met the inclusion criteria were included. The women were divided into two groups, those who received L/T and those who underwent L/S Burch colposuspension. To assess the impact of SUI on quality of life, several quality-of-life questionnaires, including the urinary distress inventory (UDI-6), the incontinence impact questionnaire (IIQ-7), the short-form-36 (SF-36) physical component summary, and the mental component summary (MCS), were evaluated. Post-operative pain was assessed with a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Results: The cohort consisted of 74 patients. The surgical time and estimated blood loss in the L/S group was significantly lower than in the L/T group (both p<0.001). The sixth and 48th-hour VAS score in the L/S group was significantly lower than in the L/T group (both p<0.001). There was a significant decrease in UDI-6 and IIQ-7 score in patients who underwent L/S-Burch colposuspension and L/T-Burch colposuspension at the 6th-month follow-up (p<0.001 and p<0.001, respectively). At the sixth-month follow-up, the SF-36 MCS score was significantly lower in the L/S group compared with the L/T group (p=0.014). Conclusion: In our study, the results of Burch colposuspension methods were consistent with the literature. L/S-Burch colposuspension is superior in terms of surgical time, blood loss, hospital stay, pain management, and recovery time. The significant decrease in UDI-6 and IIQ-7 scores at the 6-month follow-up shows that both methods provide improvement in urinary incontinence symptoms and increase quality of life. [J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2025; 26(3): 190-4].