ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2016
Does the diagnosis of detrusor overactivity affect the long-term prognosis of patients treated with a retropubic midurethral sling?
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment outcome of women with urodynamic mixed urinary incontinence: an observational study.International urogynecology journal · 2023Observational
- Outcomes of urodynamic mixed urinary incontinence and urodynamic stress incontinence with urgency after mid-urethral sling surgery.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThere are few long-term studies on the midurethral sling (MUS) procedure in patients with preoperative detrusor overactivity (DO) and there is debate regarding the usefulness of preoperative cystometry. This study was designed to provide long-term efficacy and safety data for the Advantage MUS and to compare the outcomes in patients with pure urodynamic stress incontinence (USI) with the outcomes in patients with mixed USI and DO.
methodsThis was a retrospective consecutive case series study of 100 patients with USI (USI-only group) matched to a consecutive group of a further 100 patients with preoperative USI and DO (mixed group) treated with a retropubic MUS. Outcomes were assessed using the King's Health Questionnaire and Patient Global Impression of Improvement questionnaire.
resultsAfter a mean follow up of 6 years more patients in the USI-only group described themselves as "very much better" or "much better" (86 % USI-only group vs. 57 % mixed group; p = 0.007). Quality of life was improved at 6 years from baseline in both groups. Patients in the mixed group were more likely to complain of urgency (69 % vs. 42 %; p = 0.0007) which was more likely to be severe (34 % vs. 10 %; p = 0.004). A repeat MUS procedure was needed in 1 % of patients and 0.6 % needed surgical removal of the MUS for persistent troublesome pain.
conclusionsThis study suggests that the preoperative diagnosis of DO affects the long-term patient-perceived outcome of the MUS procedure. However, most patients have significant long-term improvement in quality of life.
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.