Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16034879›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2005

Open retropubic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women.

M C Lapitan, D J Cody, A M Grant

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Urethral injection therapy for urinary incontinence in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  2. Adrenergic drugs for urinary incontinence in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2005
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. The surgical treatment of female stress urinary incontinence.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India · 2010
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Stress urinary incontinence: Sling or colposuspension?Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India · 2007
    Article
  17. Surgery for stress urinary incontinence in women: A 2006 review.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India · 2007
    Article
  18. Current trends in the evaluation and management of female urinary incontinence.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2006
    Review
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

M C LapitanDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of the Philippines - Philippine General Hospital, Taft Avenue, Manila, Philippines, 1000. melalapitan@gmail.com
D J Cody
A M Grant
University of Aberdeen · GBPhilippine General Hospital · PH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUrinary incontinence is a common and potentially debilitating problem. Open retropubic colposuspension is a surgical treatment which involves lifting the tissues near the bladder neck and proximal urethra in the area behind the anterior pubic bones to correct deficient urethral closure.

objectivesTo assess the effects of open retropubic colposuspension for the treatment of urinary incontinence. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group specialised register (searched 30 June 2004)and reference lists of relevant articles. We contacted investigators to locate extra studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in women with symptoms or urodynamic diagnoses of stress or mixed incontinence that included open retropubic colposuspension surgery in at least one trial group. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Studies were evaluated for methodological quality and appropriateness for inclusion and data extracted by two of the reviewers. Trial data were analysed by intervention. Where appropriate, a summary statistic was calculated. MAIN

resultsThis review included 39 trials involving a total of 3301 women. Overall cure rates were 68.9% to 88.0% for open retropubic colposuspension. Two small studies suggest lower failure rates after open retropubic colposuspension than conservative treatment. Similarly, one trial suggests lower failure rates after open retropubic colposuspension compared to anticholinergic treatment. Evidence from six trials showed a lower failure rate for subjective cure after open retropubic colposuspension than after anterior colporrhaphy. Such benefit was maintained over time (RR of failure 0.51; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.76 before the first year, RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.57 at one to five years, RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.75 in periods beyond 5 years). In comparison with needle suspensions there was a lower failure rate after colposuspension in the first year after surgery (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.03), after the first year (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.71), and beyond five years (RR 0.32; 95% CI 15 to 0.71). Evidence from twelve trials in comparison with suburethral slings found no significant difference in failure rates in all time periods assessed. Patient-reported failure rates in short-, medium- and long-term follow-up showed no significant difference between open and laparoscopic retropubic colposuspension, but with wide confidence intervals. In two trials failure was less common after Burch (RR 0.38 95% CI 0.18 to 0.76) than after the Marshall Marchetti Krantz procedure at one to five year follow-up. There were few data at any other follow-up time.In general, the evidence available does not show a higher morbidity or complication rate with open retropubic colposuspension, compared to the other open surgical techniques, although pelvic organ prolapse is more common than after anterior colporrhaphy and sling procedures. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe evidence available indicates that open retropubic colposuspension is an effective treatment modality for stress urinary incontinence especially in the long term. Within the first year of treatment, the overall continence rate is approximately 85-90%. After five years, approximately 70% patients can expect to be dry. Newer minimal access procedures like tension free vaginal tape look promising in comparison with open colposuspension but their long-term performance is not known and closer monitoring of its adverse event profile must be done. Laparoscopic colposuspension should allow speedier recovery but its relative safety and effectiveness is not known yet.

Indexed as

FemaleGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSuture TechniquesUrinary IncontinenceUrinary Incontinence, StressUrologic Surgical ProceduresVagina

Identifiers

PMID16034879
OpenAlexW4251597721

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.