ArticlePloS one2017
Quality of life and objective outcome assessment in women with tape division after surgery for stress urinary incontinence.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multidimensional outcomes of suburethral synthetic midurethral sling removal.World journal of urology · 2020Article
- Tobacco use, immunosuppressive, chronic pain, and psychiatric conditions are prevalent in women with symptomatic mesh complications undergoing mesh removal surgery.Investigative and clinical urology · 2020Article
- Long-term outcomes of anti-incontinence surgery and subsequent transvaginal sling incision for urethral obstruction.International urogynecology journal · 2019Article
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMidurethral tapes may cause long-term complications such as voiding dysfunction, groin pain, de novo urgency or mesh erosion, which necessitate a reoperation. There is a paucity of data regarding health related quality of life in patients undergoing tape removal. The aim of the study was to evaluate quality of life (QoL) and objective outcome after midurethral tape division or excision.
methodsAll patients who underwent a midurethral tape division for voiding difficulties, pain or therapy resistant de novo overactive bladder between 1999 and 2014 were invited for follow-up. A control group with a suburethral tape without division was established in a 1:2 ratio and matched for age, tape used and year of tape insertion. Patients completed the Kings´ Health Questionnaire (KHQ), Incontinence Outcome Questionnaire, Female Sexual Function Index Questionnaire and the Patient Global Impression of Improvement score.
resultsTape division or excision was performed in 32 women. Overall, 15 (60%) of 25 women who were alive were available for clinical examination and completed the questionnaires. Tape division was performed for voiding dysfunction (n = 7), overactive bladder (n = 2), mesh extrusion (n = 3) and ongoing pain (n = 3). Median time to tape division/excision was 10 months. Three women in the tape division group had undergone reoperation for stress urinary incontinence (SUI). At a median follow-up of 11 years (IQR 9-13) subjective SUI rate was 53% (8/15 women) in the tape division group and 17% (5/30) in the control group (p = 0.016), with no significant differences in objective SUI rates between groups. With regard to quality of life, the study group had significantly worse scores in the SUI related domains role limitation, physical limitation, severity measures and social limitations (KHQ) compared to the control group.
conclusionsWomen needing tape division or excision have lower SUI related QoL scores compared to controls mostly because of higher subjective SUI rates.
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.