S'abonner

Limits on vaginal intercourse after mid-urethral sling: a randomized trial - 21/11/25

Doi : 10.1016/j.ajog.2025.10.013 
Catherine A. Matthews, MD a, , Katherine N. Hines, MD b, Hoa Nguyen, MD c, Sarah Collins, MD d, Erinn Myers, MD e, Julia Geynisman-Tan, MD f, Gregory Russell, MS g, Candace Parker-Autry, MD h, Kimberly Kenton, MS, MD i
a Professor at Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Urology, Winston-Salem, NC 
b Urogynecologist, Virginia Beach Obstetrics and Gynecology, Virginia Beach, VA 
c Assistant Professor at University of Vermont, Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Burlington, VT 
d Associate Professor at University of Chicago, Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chicago, IL 
e Assistant Professor at Atrium Health Charlotte, Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Charlotte, NC 
f Associate Professor at Northwestern Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chicago, IL 
g Department of Biostatistics and Data Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 
h Associate Professor at Wake Forest University, School of Medicine Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Urology, Winston-Salem, NC 
i Professor at University of Chicago, Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chicago, IL 

Corresponding author: Catherine Matthews, MD.
Sous presse. Épreuves corrigées par l'auteur. Disponible en ligne depuis le Friday 21 November 2025

Abstract

Background

Women undergoing synthetic mid-urethral slings for stress urinary incontinence are typically advised to refrain from penetrating intercourse for 4 to 6 weeks postprocedure, yet no prospective studies inform this recommendation.

Objective

To compare satisfaction between women restricted from sexual intercourse for 2 weeks (early) vs 6 weeks (standard) after retropubic sling surgery. Secondary aims compared preference for the alternative randomization assignment, sexual function including de novo dyspareunia, urinary incontinence symptoms, and adverse events.

Study Design

This is a randomized, multicentered clinical trial of sexually active women undergoing synthetic retropubic sling. At baseline, women completed the Urinary Distress Inventory 6 and Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire, International Urogynecology Association-Revised questionnaires. At 2 weeks postsurgery, if the vaginal incision was intact, women were randomized to early or standard restrictions for vaginal intercourse. Women returned at 3 months for repeat pelvic examination and questionnaires. The primary outcome, collected at 3 months, was patient satisfaction (very satisfied or satisfied) on a 5-point Likert scale with ability to return to vaginal intercourse. Using a 2-sample proportion test with type 1 error set to 0.05% and 80% power, we needed 59 women per group to detect a difference of 80% vs 54% satisfaction in the early vs standard groups, respectively.

Results

Between April 2021 and June 2024, 124 women were randomized with 62 per group across 4 centers in the United States. Mean age was 47 years. The majority were premenopausal (72%) and Caucasian (85%). Satisfaction with return to vaginal penetration was 66% (31/47) and 68% (30/44) with an estimated difference in proportions and 95% confidence interval of 2.5% (−19.3%, 24.3%) in the early vs standard groups, respectively (P>.99). Preference for the alternate randomization group was 13% (6/47) in the early vs 43% (19/44) in the standard group (P=.0019). There were 0 cases of mesh exposure. De novo dyspareunia at 3 months was reported in 6/36 (17%) in the early vs 2/29 (7%) in the standard resumption group (P=.28). There was marked improvement in urinary incontinence and sexual function symptoms at 3 months with no difference between groups.

Conclusion

Permission to resume vaginal intercourse after 2 vs 6 weeks following isolated retropubic sling resulted in similarly high satisfaction with no adverse impact on efficacy, mesh exposure, or sexual function. Larger studies are needed to investigate the impact of early return to sexual function on de novo dyspareunia. Women significantly (P=.0019) preferred the option of resuming penetrating intercourse after 2 weeks.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Video


(11.01 Mo)

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Key words : postoperative restrictions, sexual intercourse, sling, stress incontinence


Plan


 Catherine Matthews received grant funding from Boston Scientific and Coloplast; is a consultant for Boston Scientific and Coloplast; and is an expert witness for Ethicon. Kimberly Kenton is an expert Witness for Ethicon; is a consultant for Axonics; and received grant funding from Axonics. Dr Sarah Collins is an expert witness for Ethicon and content expert for MCG Health. Dr Julia Geynisman-Tan received grant funding from Coloplast. The other authors report no conflict of interest.
 Late-breaking full oral presentation, American Urogynecology Society Annual Meeting, Washington DC, 2024; Short oral presentation, International Continence Society Annual Meeting, Abu Dhabi, 2025.
 Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04680897.
 Date of registration: December 17, 2020.
 Date of initial participant enrollment: April 16, 2021.
 URL of the registration site: NCT04680897.
 Research data are available from Dr Catherine Matthews upon request.
 Funding sources: None.
 Cite this article as: Matthews CA, Hines KN, Nguyen H, et al. Limits on vaginal intercourse after mid-urethral sling: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2025;XXX:XX–XX.


© 2025  Elsevier Inc. Tous droits réservés.
Ajouter à ma bibliothèque Retirer de ma bibliothèque Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?

Elsevier s'engage à rendre ses eBooks accessibles et à se conformer aux lois applicables. Compte tenu de notre vaste bibliothèque de titres, il existe des cas où rendre un livre électronique entièrement accessible présente des défis uniques et l'inclusion de fonctionnalités complètes pourrait transformer sa nature au point de ne plus servir son objectif principal ou d'entraîner un fardeau disproportionné pour l'éditeur. Par conséquent, l'accessibilité de cet eBook peut être limitée. Voir plus

Mon compte


Plateformes Elsevier Masson

Déclaration CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM est déclaré à la CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.

En application de la loi nº78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 relative à l'informatique, aux fichiers et aux libertés, vous disposez des droits d'opposition (art.26 de la loi), d'accès (art.34 à 38 de la loi), et de rectification (art.36 de la loi) des données vous concernant. Ainsi, vous pouvez exiger que soient rectifiées, complétées, clarifiées, mises à jour ou effacées les informations vous concernant qui sont inexactes, incomplètes, équivoques, périmées ou dont la collecte ou l'utilisation ou la conservation est interdite.
Les informations personnelles concernant les visiteurs de notre site, y compris leur identité, sont confidentielles.
Le responsable du site s'engage sur l'honneur à respecter les conditions légales de confidentialité applicables en France et à ne pas divulguer ces informations à des tiers.


Tout le contenu de ce site: Copyright © 2026 Elsevier, ses concédants de licence et ses contributeurs. Tout les droits sont réservés, y compris ceux relatifs à l'exploration de textes et de données, a la formation en IA et aux technologies similaires. Pour tout contenu en libre accès, les conditions de licence Creative Commons s'appliquent.