ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2015
Surgeon-tailored polypropylene mesh as a needleless single-incision sling versus TVT-O for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: a comparative study.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare safety and efficacy of surgeon-tailored polypropylene mesh through needleless single-incision technique (STM) versus tension-free vaginal tape-obturator (TVT-O) aiming to decrease cost of treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI). This is important in developing countries due to limited healthcare resources. PATIENTS AND
methodsA retrospective cohort study was done at Urology and Gynecology Departments (dual-center), Cairo University, from January 2011 to August 2013. STM was inserted in 72 females, while TVT-O was inserted in 48 females. Females evaluated by cough stress test, stress and urge incontinence quality of life questionnaire (SUIQQ), Q max and abdominal leak point pressure (ALPP) were included. Different factors were compared between both groups using paired t, Wilcoxon's signed rank, McNemar, Chi-square, Fisher's exact, independent t or Mann-Whitney tests.
resultsAge, parity, previous surgeries, ALPP, intrinsic sphincter deficiency (ISD), associated prolapse and associated prolapse repair were comparable in both groups. No significant difference was found between both groups in postoperative complications (except groin pain), cure, SUIQQ indices improvement and Q max decline. In total, 65 (90 %) cured, 6 (8 %) improved while failure was detected in one (1 %) patient in STM group, while 42 (87 %) cured, 4 (8 %) improved and failure was detected in two (4 %) patients in TVT-O group. Presence of ISD (p = 0.565), urgency (p = 0.496), UUI (p = 0.531), previous surgeries (p = 0.345), associated urogenital prolapse (p = 0.218) or associated prolapse repair (p = 0.592) did not lead to any significant difference in outcome between both groups. Cost of mesh decreased from US$500 (TVT-O) to US$10 (STM).
conclusionOutcome of STM is comparable to TVT-O. Furthermore, STM is more economic.
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.