A group of 6 patients, suffering from SUI relapse after the primary surgery, using the polipropylene midurethral tape inserted retropubically, was included in this study. The mean age of patients, who underwent primary surgery was 63.5 and at secondary surgery – 66.8. The mean BMI was 30.6 at primary surgery and 30.3 at secondary surgery. In the follow – up after the primary and secondary surgery, the patients completed the Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI-6) short form, a questionnaire of severity of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS: pelvic pain, frequency, nocturia, urgency, incontinence, SUI, hesitancy, dysuria, recurrent UTI) ranging from 0 to 3 (0: not at all, 1: slight, 2: moderate, 3: severe complaints). The visual analogue scale (VAS) of subjective assessment of lower urinary tract function, ranging from 0 to 100 (0: very bad, 100: perfect function), was also rated. The tape localization and residual volume were assessed by introital ultrasound [2]. If the tape was displaced (lower edge above 37.5% of the urethral length) or if the residual volume was above 50 ml together with recurrent urinary tract infections (UTI), the tape was always removed. Patients, whose lower edge of the tape was below 37.5% of the urethral length, and whose main complaint was the recurrence of SUI, were qualified for repair surgery using midurethral tape plication. The procedure was performed under general anesthesia. Due to the small group of analyzed patients, mean values obtained from questionnaires before and after secondary surgery were compared. This is a retrospective observational study.