Trial reportInternational urogynecology journal2014
A randomized controlled trial comparing three single-incision minislings for stress urinary incontinence.
Trial report in International urogynecology journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00751088 (A Comparison Among Three Single-incision Devices for the Treatment of Female Urinary Genuine Stress Incontinence), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 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.
A Comparison Among Three Single-incision Devices for the Treatment of Female Urinary Genuine Stress Incontinence: a Randomized Controlled Study.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Single-incision sling operations for urinary incontinence in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Adjustable slings versus other surgical methods in female stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International urogynecology journal · 2023Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of female stress urinary incontinence treatments with adjustable single-incision mini-slings and transobturator tension-free vaginal tape surgeries.BMC urology · 2015Pooled it
- Instruments Used for the Assessment of SUI Severity in Urogynecologic Surgical Trials: A Scoping Review.International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- Endopelvic free anchor minisling technique for stress urinary incontinence treatment: 10 years of experience.International urogynecology journal · 2016Article
- Heterogeneity in post-intervention prolapse and urinary outcome reporting: a one-year review of the International Urogynecology Journal.International urogynecology journal · 2015Review
- Hydronephrosis and utero-vaginal prolapse in postmenopausal women: management and treatment.Il Giornale di chirurgiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisStudies have observed a significant heterogeneity in efficacy data for single-incision minislings (SIMS) as surgical treatment for female urinary incontinence (UI). Our study aim was to test the hypothesis that different vaginal kits for SIMS have different long-term outcomes.
methodsOne hundred and twenty women with stress (SUI) or mixed (MUI) UI were enrolled in a multicenter randomized clinical trial (registration number NCT00751088) and treated with three different SIMS (Ajust, MiniArc, or TVT Secur System). Duration of follow-up was at least 24 months from surgery. The primary outcome was the subjective cure rate at 24 months from surgery; secondary outcomes were rates of total failure and reoperations for UI.
resultsAt study end, no difference was detected between groups in terms of total subjective cure rate [21 (52.5%) vs. 26 (65.0%) vs. 21 (52.5%), in Ajust, MiniArc, and TVT Secur System group, respectively; P = 0.412] or in terms of total failure rate [24 (60.0%) vs. 22 (55.0 %) vs. 27 (67.5 %), in Ajust, MiniArc, and TVT Secur System group, respectively; P = 0.432]. The proportion of patients who received a second surgery for UI was also not significantly different between groups [13 (32.5%) vs. 10 (25.0%) vs. 13 (32.5%), in Ajust, MiniArc, and TVT Secur System, respectively; P = 0.831].
conclusionThe long-term efficacy of SIMS does not differ between the vaginal kits examined.
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.