Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18157642›Full record

Trial reportInternational urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction2008

Where should bulking agents for female urodynamic stress incontinence be injected?

Annette Kuhn, Werner Stadlmayr, Daniela Lengsfeld, Michel D Mueller

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02538991 (TVT Versus Bulkamid®-Injections in Treatment of Stress Urinary Incontinence - Patient Satisfaction and Complications of the Treatment), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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.

NCT02538991 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

TVT Versus Bulkamid®-Injections in Treatment of Stress Urinary Incontinence - Patient Satisfaction and Complications of the Treatment

TypeinterventionalSponsorHelsinki University Central HospitalRan2015 to 2024Enrolled224ConditionsUrinary Stress IncontinenceArmsBulkamid, Tension-free Vaginal Tape
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Urethral injection therapy for urinary incontinence in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Where should bulking agents for female urodynamic stress incontinence be injected?International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction · 2008
    Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Annette KuhnDepartment of Urogynaecology, Frauenklinik, Effingerstr. 102, CH 3010 Bern, Switzerland. annette.kuhn@insel.ch
Werner Stadlmayr
Daniela Lengsfeld
Michel D Mueller
University Hospital of Bern · CHUniversitäts Frauenklinik · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For bulking agents used for female stress urinary incontinence, the recommendation for the anatomical placement varies as some injectables are to be placed close to the bladder neck and others midurethrally. Aim of the study was to determine if there are differences concerning the outcome after transurethral collagen injections depending on the anatomical placement midurethrally or at the bladder neck. We randomly assigned 30 elderly female patients with urodynamic stress incontinence to either transurethral collagen injection midurethrally or to the bladder neck. Prior to injection and at ten month follow-up, maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP), functional urethral length (FUL), maximum flow rate and cough test were performed and the patient was asked to estimate her bladder condition using a visual analogue scale. Postoperative contentness was 8 (median, 95% confidence interval 5-9) in the midurethral group and 8 (median, 95% confidence interval 7-10) in the bladder neck group with a p value of 0.012, 95% confidence interval -2.464 to -0.2859, in favour to midurethral injections. MUCP and FUL increased significantly in both groups and flow rate decreased in both groups. Continence was 66.6% in the midurethral group and 60% for the bladder neck group respectively. Both midurethral and bladder neck collagen injections improve patients' satisfaction almost equally with a small advantage for midurethral injections.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overCollagenFemaleHumansInjections, IntramuscularMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionTreatment OutcomeUrethraUrinary BladderUrinary Incontinence, StressCollagen

Identifiers

PMID18157642
OpenAlexW1990332438

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.