Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12076494›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2002

Bladder neck needle suspension for urinary incontinence in women.

C M Glazener, K Cooper

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

C M GlazenerHealth Services Research Unit (Foresterhill Lea), University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK, AB25 2ZD. c.glazener@abdn.ac.uk
K Cooper
University of Aberdeen · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBladder neck needle suspension is an operation traditionally used for moderate or severe stress urinary incontinence in women. About a third of adult women experience some urinary incontinence, and about a third of them have moderate or severe symptoms.

objectivesTo determine the effects of needle suspension on stress or mixed urinary incontinence in comparison with other management options. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group specialised register and reference lists of relevant articles. Date of last search: December 2001. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials that included needle suspension for the treatment of urinary incontinence. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trials were assessed and data extracted independently by at least two reviewers. One trial investigator was contacted for additional information. MAIN

resultsEight trials were identified which included 327 women having six different types of needle suspension procedures and 407 who received comparison interventions. Needle suspensions were more likely to fail than open abdominal retropubic suspension (higher subjective failure rate after the first year (70/267, 26% failed vs 33/243, 14% failed after open abdominal retropubic suspension: RR 2.10, 95% CI 1.45 to 3.04) and there were more peri-operative complications (36/75, 48% vs 23/77, 30%; RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.15), but there were no significant differences for other outcome measures. This effect was confined to women with primary incontinence: too few women with recurrent incontinence were studied to draw conclusions about the effects of secondary operations. Needle suspensions may be as effective as anterior vaginal repair (46/128, 36% failed after needles vs 50/129, 39% after anterior repair; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.26) but there was little information about morbidity. Data for comparison with suburethral slings were inconclusive because they came from a small and atypical population. No trials compared needle suspensions with conservative management, peri-urethral injections or sham or laparoscopic surgery. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsBladder neck needle suspension surgery is probably not as good as open abdominal retropubic suspension for the treatment of primary genuine stress urinary incontinence in terms of lower cure rates and higher morbidity. However, the reliability of the evidence was limited by poor quality and small trials. There was not enough information to comment on secondary procedures or on comparisons with suburethral sling operations. Although cure rates were similar after needle suspension compared with after anterior vaginal repair, the data were insufficient to be reliable and inadequate to compare morbidity.

Indexed as

Suture TechniquesFemaleHumansNeedlesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicUrethraUrinary BladderUrinary Incontinence, Stress

Identifiers

PMID12076494
OpenAlexW4232741364

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.