Kolposuspenze dle Burche – zlatý standard v operacích ženské močové inkontinence
Současná urogynekologická operativa I

Czech version

Authors: I. Huvar
Published in: Urol List 2008; 6(1): 44-47

Overview

Burch colposuspension was certainly the most significant urogynaecological surgical procedure in the second half of the 20^th century. After it was published by Burch in 1961, it began to be widely used relatively soon on both the sides of the Atlantic and beginning with the 1980's became a sort of standard in urogynaecological surgery. It surpassed other surgical methods for its success rate, sustainable complication rate, as well as for its lasting effect. The principle of the surgery consists in elevation and, primarily, fixation of the urinary bladder cervix and proximal urethra with the use of nonabsorbable stitches, suspending the lateral vaginal fornix to lig. iliopectineum (lig. Cooperi). With progress in laparoscopic methods, also the laparoscopic alternative was introduced in the late 1980's. According to Cochrane Review, its success rate one year post-op is 85–90 %, and about 70 % 5 years pos-op – a result which had not been achieved by any other surgical method before. The method only began to decline in importance after less invasive methods began to be used in the mid 1990's, but there are still indications which justify its application.

Key words:
stress urinary incontinence, surgical treatment of incontinence, colposuspension, Burch

Sources

1. Akpinar H, Cetinel B, Demirkesen O et al. Long-term results of Burch colposuspension. Int J Urol 2000; 7(4): 119-125.

2. Alcalay M, Monga A, Stanton SL. Burch colposuspension: a 10-20 year follow up. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1995; 102(9): 740-745.

3. Chinegwundoh FI, Nayeem N. Outcome of Burch colposuspension in a district general hospital. Br J Clin Pract 1995; 49(1): 41-42.

4. Christensen H, Laybourn C, Eickhoff JH, Frimodt-Moller C. Long-term results of the Stamey Bladderneck suspension procedure and of the Burch colposuspension. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1997; 31(4): 349-353.

5. Colombo M, Vitobello D, Proietti F, Milani R. Randomised comparison of Burch colposuspension versus anterior colporrhaphy in women with stress urinary incontinence and anterior vaginal wall prolapse. BJOG 2000; 107(4): 544-551.

6. Colombo M, Milani R, Vitobello D, Maggioni A. A randomized comparison of Burch colposuspension and abdominal paravaginal defect repair for female stress urinary incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 175(1): 78-84.

7. Colombo M, Zanetta G, Vitobello D, Milani R. The Burch colposuspension for women with and without detrusor overactivity. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1996; 103(3): 255-260.

8. Colombo M, Scalambrino S, Maggioni A, Milani R. Burch colposuspension versus modified Marshall- Marchetti-Krantz urethropexy for primary genuine stress urinary incontinence: a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 171(6): 1573-1579.

9. Dean NM, Ellis G,Wilson PD, Herbison GP. Laparoscopis colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; 3: CD 002239.

10. Demirci F, Yucel O, Eren S et al. Long-term results of Burch colposuspension. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2001; 51(4): 243-247.

11. Demirci F, Petri E. Perioperative complications of Burch colposuspension. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2000; 11(3): 170-175.

12. Demirci F, Yucel N, Ozden S et al. A retrospective review of perioperative complications in 360 patients who had Burch colposuspension. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 39(4): 472-475.

13. Dietz HP, Wilson PD. Colposuspension success and failure: a long-term objective follow-up study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2000; 11(6): 346- 351.

14. Drouin J, Tessier J, Bertrand PE, Schick E. Burch colposuspension: long-term results and review of published reports. Urology 1999; 54(5): 808-814.

15. Feyereisl J, Dreher E, Haenggi W et al. Long-term results after Burch colposuspension. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 171(3): 647-652.

16. Kjolhede P. Genital prolapse in women treated successfully and unsuccessfully by the Burch colposuspension. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1998; 77(4): 444-450.

17. Kjolhede P, Ryden G. Clinical and urodynamic characteristics of women with recurrent urinary incontinence after Burch colposuspension. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1997; 76(5): 461-467.

18. Kjolhede P, Lindehammar H. Pelvic floor neuropathy in relation to the outcome of Burch colposuspension. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 1997; 8(2): 61-65.

19. Lapitan MC, Cody DJ, Grant AM. Open reteropubic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005; 3.

20. Martan A, Masata J, Halaska M, Voigt R. Ultrasound imaging of the lower urinary system in women after Burch colposuspension. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 17(1): 58-64.

22. Rosen DM, Korda AR, Waugh RC. Ureteric injury at Burch colposuspension. 4 case reports and literature review. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1996; 36(3): 354- 358.

23. Ross J. Laparoscopy or open Burch colposuspension? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 1998; 10(5): 405- 409.

24. Weber AM, Walters MD. Burch procedure compared with sling for stress urinary incontinence: a decision analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 96(6): 867- 873.

25. Wiskind AK, Creighton SM, Stanton SL. The incidence of genital prolapse after the Burch colposuspension. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 167(2): 399- 404; discussion 404-405.