Canadian Urological Association position statement on the use of transvaginal mesh.

Stress incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) are common conditions. There is high-level evidence that midurethral mesh slings for stress incontinence are effective and safe; however, the rare but serious potential risks of this surgery must be discussed with the patient. The use of transvaginal mesh for prolapse repair does not appear to be supported by the current evidence, and its use should be restricted to specialized pelvic floor surgeons and specific clinical situations.

Choosing the right sling for your patient.

Recent data has demonstrated a one in five lifetime risk of a woman requiring stress urinary incontinence (SUI) surgery. Currently, most women opt for a synthetic midurethral sling (MUS), with over 3.6 million placed worldwide. This article attempts to identify whether a gold standard exists with regards to surgical correction of female SUI. When considering which sling type to use for which incontinent woman, the published data demonstrates excellent results for both synthetic mesh (retropubic or transobturator routes) and fascial pubovaginal slings for most patients. Intrinsic sphincter deficiency does appear to be better treated with the use of a retropubic approach, although still with less than stellar results. With little to differentiate, the treatment of most female SUI may be solely based on which sling the surgeon feels most comfortable performing. Currently, most urologists and gynecologists favour synthetic MUS over fascial slings in surgical-naïve patients; however, recent U.S Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warnings concerning the use of mesh in transvaginal surgery have patients questioning the safety of synthetic MUS for the treatment of SUI.

Management of patients with stress urinary incontinence after failed midurethral sling.

Surgical failure rates after midurethral sling (MUS) procedures are variable and range from approximately 8-57% at five years of followup. The disparity in long-term failure rates is explained by a lack of long-term followup and lack of a clear definition of what constitutes failure. A recent Cochrane review illustrates that no high-quality data exists to recommend or refute any of the different management strategies for recurrent or persistent stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after failed MUS surgery. Clinical evaluation requires a complete history, physical examination, and establishment of patient goals. Conservative treatment measures include pelvic floor physiotherapy, incontinence pessary dish, commercially available devices (Uresta®, Impressa®), or medical therapy. Minimally invasive therapies include periurethral bulking agents (bladder neck injections) and sling plication. Surgical options include repeat MUS with or without mesh removal, salvage autologous fascial sling or Burch colposuspension, or salvage artificial urinary sphincter insertion. In this paper, we present the available evidence to support each of these approaches and include the management strategy used by our review panel for patients that present with SUI after failed midurethral sling.

The pubovaginal sling: Reintroducing an old friend.

The surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) has evolved over the past century, using various techniques of retropubic colposuspensions and sling procedures. In the past two decades, the sling has become the mainstay of surgical treatment of SUI, with the synthetic midurethral sling (MUS) leading the way. With the recent concerns raised by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Health Canada about the safety of vaginal surgery using mesh implants, including the MUS, urologists and gynecologists should be familiar with suitable alternatives, including the pubovaginal sling (PVS), which often incorporates autologous fascia. Surgeons should be expected to discuss the surgical options to patients in more detail so that an informed decision can be made by both parties on which surgery to choose. Despite the MUS still being considered the "gold standard" by many, both the urologist and gynecologist who manage SUI should understand the indications for a PVS with autologous fascia, as well as its surgical technique and outcomes. This knowledge is required to aid in the decision-making of both the patient and her surgeon. In this article, the role of the PVS and the description of its surgical technique are presented.

Acquired hemophilia A: A rare cause of gross hematuria.

Acquired hemophilia A is a rare condition caused by spontaneous development of factor VIII inhibitor. This condition most commonly presents with multiple hemorrhagic symptoms and isolated hematuria is exceedingly rare. Early diagnosis is important, as this condition carries a high mortality rate (13-22%). We present a case of an 82-year-old man with isolated hematuria caused by a factor VIII inhibitor who was successfully treated with recombinant activated factor VII concentrate, as well as prednisone and cyclophosphamide.

Microsatellite instability in multifocal urothelial carcinoma and effect on BAX and AXIN2.

OBJECTIVES: Urothelial carcinomas have a synchronous or metachronous multifocal pattern of occurrence, questioning their clonal origin. Genetic alterations such as microsatellite instability (MSI) affect various tumors including urothelial cancers. These alterations can affect repeat sequences and cause mutations in coding regions of genes involved in transformation, tumor suppression and apoptosis. Recently, the eight-guanine (G8) and the seven-guanine (G7) repeat sequences of the BAX and AXIN2 genes respectively, were shown altered in different cancers. Since BAX is involved in apoptosis while the AXIN2 is involved in beta-catenin metabolism, a protein involved in cell adhesion and DNA transcription, and due to the multifocal nature of urothelial cancer, we investigated these two genes for alterations in repeat sequences in patients with this cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The eight microsatellites BAT25, BAT26, D2S123, D3S1029, D5S346, D17S588, D17S261, MYCL1 were used to screen 25 tumors from seven patients with eight upper and 17 lower urinary tract carcinomas and compare them to DNA from normal tissue. Regions spanning the G8 and G7 repeat sequences of BAX and AXIN2 were sequenced for mutations including expansion and deletion abnormalities. RESULTS: Six microsatellites were seen altered in one patient with kidney and bladder cancer affecting both tissues when compared to normal DNA albeit not similarly except for MYCL1. There was no change in the BAX G8 or AXIN2 G7 microsatellites. There was no MSI seen in any of the remaining six patients. CONCLUSION: MSI occurs in urothelial cancer, but was not seen to affect the BAX G8 or AXIN2 G7 repeats in this study. However, to determine if MSI affects these genes in these tumors will require a larger study. Moreover, our results suggest that these tumors may have a monoclonal origin with further genetic changes resulting in oligoclonality, or could suggest a similar initiating event leading to a similar initial genetic alteration at different sites with subsequent varying events due to a genetically unstable malignant phenotype.