Trial reportBMC women's health2010
Protocol for the CUPIDO trials; multicenter randomized controlled trials to assess the value of combining prolapse surgery and incontinence surgery in patients with genital prolapse and evident stress incontinence (CUPIDO I) and in patients with genital prolapse and occult stress incontinence (CUPIDO II).
Trial report in BMC women's health, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Surgery for women with pelvic organ prolapse with or without stress urinary incontinence.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Transvaginal mesh or grafts compared with native tissue repair for vaginal prolapse.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Vaginal prolapse repair with or without a midurethral sling in women with genital prolapse and occult stress urinary incontinence: a randomized trial.International urogynecology journal · 2016Trial
- Predicting the occurrence of stress urinary incontinence after prolapse surgery: a machine learning-based model.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Article
- Seven years of objective and subjective outcomes of transobturator (TVT-O) vaginal tape: why do tapes fail?International urogynecology journal · 2014Article
- Incidence and risk factors of postoperative stress urinary incontinence following laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in patients with negative preoperative prolapse reduction stress testing.International urogynecology journal · 2013Article
- Combined Burch urethropexy and anterior rectopexy in pelvic organ prolapse: skip the mesh.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2012Article
- Twenty years of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: where are we now?International urogynecology journal · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAbout 40% of all patients with genital prolapse report stress-incontinence. In about half of the 60% patients that do not report stress-incontinence, occult urinary stress-incontinence can be detected. In these patients stress-incontinence is masked due to kinking or compression of the urethra by the prolapse.In case surgical correction is indicated there are two strategies to manage patients with combined prolapse and (occult) stress incontinence. This strategy is either (i) a combination of prolapse surgery and stress-incontinence surgery or (ii) to correct the prolapse first and evaluate afterwards whether additional stress-incontinence surgery is indicated. The advantage of combining prolapse and stress-incontinence surgery is that only few patients report stress-incontinence following such combination. However, this combination has been associated with an increased risk on complications, of which the development of obstructive micturition symptoms, overactive bladder symptoms and bladder retention are the most important ones. Furthermore, combining two procedures may be unnecessary as performing only prolapse surgery may cure stress-incontinence. In the randomized CUPIDO trials both strategies are compared in patients with prolapse and evident stress incontinence (CUPIDO I trial) and in patients with prolapse and occult stress incontinence (CUPIDO II trial). METHODS/
designThe CUPIDO trials are two multicenter randomized controlled trials in which women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) or occult stress urinary incontinence (OSUI) are randomized to prolapse surgery combined with anti incontinence surgery (concomitant surgery) or to prolapse surgery only. Patients with at least stage 2 POP are eligible, women with evident SUI are randomized in CUPIDO I. Patients without SUI are eligible for CUPIDO II and will have urodynamic evaluation or a standardized redression test. Women with OSUI are randomized, women without OSUI are followed up but not randomized. The primary outcome measure is absence of SUI twelve months after surgery. Furthermore, economic evaluations are conducted, and the effectiveness of urodynamic investigation is evaluated against a non-invasive way to determine SUI in women with POP. A total of 450 women will be included in the study.
trial registrationTrial registration http://www.trialregister.nl NTRR 1197 en 1070.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.