Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24880654›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2014

Single-incision sling operations for urinary incontinence in women.

Arjun Nambiar, June D Cody, Stephen T Jeffery

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02506309 (Prospective Randomized Comparison of the Trans-obturator Mid-urethral Sling and the Single-incision Sling in Women With Stress Urinary Incontinence), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 7 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.

NCT02506309 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

Prospective Randomized Comparison of the Trans-obturator Mid-urethral Sling and the Single-incision Sling in Women With Stress Urinary Incontinence

TypeinterventionalSponsorBrno University HospitalRan2015 to 2019Enrolled168ConditionsUrinary Incontinence, StressArmsTOT - inside-out trans-obturator tape/sling, SIS - Innovative fixation single incision sling
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Single-incision sling operations for urinary incontinence in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Mid-urethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  5. Open retropubic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Effectiveness and Safety of Shorter Incontinence Slings.International urogynecology journal · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Observational
  19. Anatomic relation between single-incision slings and the obturator vessels.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2017
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Arjun NambiarDepartment of Urology, Ward H, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, UK, SA6 6NL.
June D Cody
Stephen T Jeffery
Morriston Hospital · GBUniversity of Aberdeen · GBUniversity of Cape Town · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUrinary incontinence has been shown to affect up to 50% of women. Studies in the United States have shown that up to 80% of these women have an element of stress urinary incontinence. Colposuspension and now mid-urethral slings have been shown to be effective in treating patients with stress incontinence. However, associated adverse events include bladder and bowel injury, groin pain and haematoma formation. This has led to the development of third-generation single-incision slings, also referred to as mini-slings.It should be noted that TVT-Secur (Gynecare, Bridgewater, NJ, USA) is one type of single-incision sling; it has been withdrawn from the market because of poor results. However, it is one of the most widely studied single-incision slings and was used in several of the trials included in this review. Despite its withdrawal from clinical use, it was decided that data pertaining to this sling should be included in the first iteration of this review, so that level 1a data are available in the literature to confirm its lack of efficacy.

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of mini-sling procedures in women with urodynamic clinical stress or mixed urinary incontinence in terms of improved continence status, quality of life or adverse events. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Trials Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and MEDLINE in process; we handsearched journals and conference proceedings (searched 6 February 2013) and searched ClinicalTrials.gov (searched 20 September 2012), the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (searched 20 September 2012) and the reference lists of relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in women with urodynamic stress incontinence, symptoms of stress incontinence or stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence, in which at least one trial arm involves one of the new single-incision slings. The definition of a single-incision sling is "a sling that does not involve either a retropubic or transobturator passage of the tape or trocar and involves only a single vaginal incision (i.e. no exit wounds in the groin or lower abdomen)." DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors assessed the methodological quality of potentially eligible trials and independently extracted data from the individual trials. MAIN

resultsWe identified 31 trials involving 3290 women. Some methodological flaws were observed in some trials; a summary of these is given in the 'Risk of bias in included studies' section.No studies compared single-incision slings versus no treatment, conservative treatment, colposuspension, laparoscopic procedures or traditional sub-urethral slings. Also no data on the comparison of single-incision slings versus retropubic mid-urethral slings (top-down approach) were available, but the review authors believe this did not affect the overall comparison versus retropubic mid-urethral slings.The types of single-incision slings included in this review were TVT-Secur (Gynecare), MiniArc (American Medical Systems, Minnetonka, MN, USA), Ajust (C.R. Bard, Inc.,Covington, GA, USA), Needleless (Mayumana Healthcare, Lisse, The Netherlands), Ophira (Promedon, Cordoba, Argentina), Tissue Fixation System (TFS PTY Ltd, Sydney, Australia) and CureMesh (D.Med. Co., Inc., Seoul, Korea).Women were more likely to remain incontinent after surgery with single-incision slings than with retropubic slings such as tension-free vaginal tape (TVT(TM)) (121/292, 41% vs 72/281, 26%; risk ratio (RR) 2.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 to 4.14). Duration of the operation was slightly shorter for single-incision slings but with higher risk of de novo urgency (RR 2.39, 95% CI 1.25 to 4.56). Four of five studies in the comparison included TVT-Secur as the single-incision sling.Single-incision slings resulted in higher incontinence rates compared with inside-out transobturator slings (30% vs 11%; RR 2.55, 95% CI 1.93 to 3.36). The adverse event profile was significantly worse, specifically consisting of higher risks of vaginal mesh exposure (RR 3.75, 95% CI 1.42 to 9.86), bladder/urethral erosion (RR 17.79, 95% CI 1.06 to 298.88) and operative blood loss (mean difference 18.79, 95% CI 3.70 to 33.88). Postoperative pain was less common with single-incision slings (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.43), and rates of long-term pain or discomfort were marginally lower, but the clinical significance of these differences is questionable. Most of these findings were derived from the trials involving TVT-Secur: Excluding the other trials showed that high risk of incontinence was principally associated with use of this device (RR 2.65, 95% CI 1.98 to 3.54). It has been withdrawn from clinical use.Evidence was insufficient to reveal a difference in incontinence rates with other single-incision slings compared with inside-out or outside-in transobturator slings. Duration of the operation was marginally shorter for single-incision slings compared with transobturator slings, but only by approximately two minutes and with significant heterogeneity in the comparison. Risks of postoperative and long-term groin/thigh pain were slightly lower with single-incision slings, but overall evidence was insufficient to suggest a significant difference in the adverse event profile for single-incision slings compared with transobturator slings. Evidence was also insufficient to permit a meaningful sensitivity analysis of the other single-incision slings compared with transobturator slings, as all confidence intervals were wide. The only significant differences were observed in rates of postoperative and long-term pain, and in duration of the operation, which marginally favoured single-incision slings.Overall results show that TVT-Secur is considerably inferior to retropubic and inside-out transobturator slings, but additional evidence is required to allow any reasonable comparison of other single-incision slings versus transobturator slings.When one single-incision sling was compared with another, evidence was insufficient to suggest a significant difference between any of the slings in any of the comparisons made. AUTHORS'

conclusionsTVT-Secur is inferior to standard mid-urethral slings for the treatment of women with stress incontinence and has already been withdrawn from clinical use. Not enough evidence has been found on other single-incision slings compared with retropubic or transobturator slings to allow reliable comparisons. Additional adequately powered and high-quality trials with longer-term follow-up are required. Trials should clearly describe the fixation mechanism of these single-incisions slings: It is apparent that, although clubbed together as a single group, a significant difference in fixation mechanisms may influence outcomes.

Indexed as

Suburethral SlingsFemaleHumansMedical Device RecallsProsthesis FailureRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicUrinary IncontinenceUrologic Surgical Procedures

Identifiers

PMID24880654
OpenAlexW4211107048

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.