ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2015
Prevalence of "complicated" stress urinary incontinence in female patients: can urodynamics provide more information in such patients?
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perineal ultrasound to assess the urethral spatial movement in stress urinary incontinence in women.BMC urology · 2023Article
- Comparison of translabial ultrasonographic and urodynamic data of female patients with urinary incontinence: Importance of translabial ultrasonography in the diagnosis of incontinence.Turkish journal of urology · 2018Article
- Neurophysiology of Micturition: a Narrative Review on Preventing Mismanagement.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyReview
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe role of urodynamic investigation has been recently questioned on the basis of data from a selected population of patients with stress urinary incontinence defined as uncomplicated. The aim of this study was to determine the proportion of patients who underwent urodynamic investigation in our centre in whom the stress urinary incontinence could be defined as uncomplicated. The secondary aim was to assess the number of women in whom the urodynamic investigation added information to the preurodynamic assessment.
methodsThis was a retrospective single-centre study. The data from female patients who underwent urodynamic evaluation prior to surgery for stress urinary incontinence between 2008 and 2012 were considered. Patients were categorized as presenting with uncomplicated or complicated stress urinary incontinence according to the definitions used in the ValUE trial. Urodynamic observations were then compared with preurodynamic data.
resultsData from 244 female patients were considered. Due to incomplete data, 33 of these patients were excluded from the evaluation. Only 47 patients (22.3 %) were considered to have uncomplicated stress urinary incontinence according to the definition used in the ValUE trial. The remaining 164 patients (77.7 %) were considered to have complicated stress urinary incontinence. Urodynamic observations differed from the preurodynamic data in 134 of 211 patients (63.5 %). A diagnosis of voiding dysfunction was obtained in 25.6 % of patients.
conclusionsThe majority of our patients had complicated stress urinary incontinence. In a relevant percentage of these patients, a urodynamic test added some new information, including a diagnosis of voiding dysfunction. The role of urodynamic investigation needs to be explored in this patient group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25925485What 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.