Evaluation and surgery for stress urinary incontinence: A FIGO working group report

Aims To review available evidence regarding evaluation and treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and provide recommendations for management of urinary incontinence under specific conditions determined by the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) Working Group. Methods The FIGO Working Group discussed the management of SUI during meetings and assessed the evidence. The search of evidence was performed using MEDLINE® and Cochrane databases as well as additional searches from societies and major organizations for additional guidelines and recommendations and hand searches from bibliographies. Initial searches from 1985 to December 31, 2012 extended until July 15, 2015. After review, recommendations are made based on levels of evidence according to the recommendations from Oxford EBM Center. Results Initial evaluation of SUI consists of history and physical examination; cough stress test, evaluation for urinary tract infections (UTI), assessment of urethral mobility, and post‐void residual volumes (LOE 5). Urodynamic studies are not necessary to evaluate patients with uncomplicated SUI (LOE 1a). Conservative treatment should be tried prior to surgery and more importantly in areas of low resources (LOE 5). Midurethral slings (MUS), pubovaginal (traditional suburethral) slings (PVS), and Burch colposuspension are effective in treating SUI (LOE 1a). Patients with SUI with ISD or UUI appear to have lower cure rates than patients without (LOE 2‐4). There are limited data on surgical outcomes under limited resources (LOE 5). Conclusions MUS, PVS, and Burch colposuspension are effective treatments for SUI. Evidence for recommendations to treat patients in underserved low resource areas is lacking. Neurourol. Urodynam. 36:518–528, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.