SynthesisWorld journal of urology2012
Slings in surgery of genuine stress incontinence.
Synthesis in World journal of urology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical management of stress urinary incontinence: A rational approach to treatment selection.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo summarize the available evidence concerning efficacy and safety of standard mid-urethral sling (SMUS) operations for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI). METHODS AND
resultsA non-systematic literature review was carried out in order to collect the available evidence concerning efficacy and safety of SMUS operations for the treatment of SUI. According to the data of our prior meta-analysis, patients receiving SMUS had significantly higher overall and objective cure rates than those receiving Burch colposuspension, although they had a higher risk of bladder perforations. Patients undergoing SMUS and pubovaginal slings had similar cure rates, although the latter were slightly more likely to experience storage lower urinary tract symptoms and had a higher reoperation rate. Patients treated with retropubic SMUS had slightly higher objective cure rates than those treated with transobturator tape (TOT); however, subjective cure rates were similar, and patients treated with TOT had a much lower risk of some complications. Meta-analysis demonstrated similar outcomes for TOTs. With regard to the novel mini-sling, another meta-analysis from Abdel-fattah et al. demonstrated that repeat continence surgery and de novo urgency incontinence were significantly higher in the patients treated with mini-slings.
conclusionPatients treated with retropubic tape (RT) experienced slightly higher continence rates than those treated with Burch colposuspension, but they faced a much higher risk of intraoperative complications. RT and pubovaginal slings were similarly effective. The use of RT was followed by objective cure rates slightly higher than TOT and by higher risk of complications. The novel mini-slings do not seem to be more effective than the SMUS.
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.