Comparison of long-term outcomes of autologous fascia lata slings with Suspend Tutoplast fascia lata allograft slings for stress incontinence

Autologous Transobturator Urethral Sling Placement for Female Stress Urinary Incontinence

“…Lastly, with regard to other biological slings that do not require harvest, previous reports 10 45.6 (42, 120) 10 0 (0, 6.8) 0.02 have shown improved outcomes with autologous fascial sling compared to these materials. 28 Additionally, some of these materials carry a theoretical risk of disease transmission, such as prion diseases. 29 A further consideration for sling placement is the surgical approach, namely retropubic vs transobturator.…”

A randomised controlled trial comparing two autologous fascial sling techniques for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women: short, medium and long-term follow-up

“…the mean score at long-term follow-up being less than half of the baseline score for the IIQ and symptom of stress leakage. Previous authors who obtained QoL follow-up data also found significant improvement after interventions at followup but over a shorter follow-up period: Maher et al [20]-6 months, Corcos et al [21]-1 year and Clyne et al [16] and McBride et al [19]-2 years. Morgan et al [22] presented QoL data of a case series of autologous slings with a mean follow-up of 52 months.…”

“…The original statistical modelling for this trial was performed in 1994 and was based on an expectation of surgery being 95% successful [11,12]. This was perhaps a little over ambitious, although papers are still presented quoting success rates of over 90% [16][17][18][19]. Our paper suggests success rates of around 87% in the short term.…”

Cadaveric fascia lata

“…McBride and colleagues [23] compared subjective quality of life measures and objective evidence of urodynamic stress incontinence that had been obtained in 71 women after placement of an autologous fascial sling (N=39) compared to a Tutoplast sling (solvent dehydrated, gammairradiated, N=32) at 24 months. Although, subjectively, there was no difference between groups, objective stress incontinence was reported as 0% in autograft vs 42% in allograft (P=0.007).…”