Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28746980›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2017

Single-incision sling operations for urinary incontinence in women.

Arjun Nambiar, June D Cody, Stephen T Jeffery, Patricia Aluko

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 31 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
15.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT03916471 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of Efficacy and Side Effects Between the Obtryx and Solyx Band With 5-year Follow-up. Prospective, Randomized and Non-inferiority Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorInstituto de Investigacion Sanitaria La FeRan2018 to 2025Enrolled166ConditionsStress Urinary IncontinenceArmsSolyx™ SIS System, Obtryx™ II System (Halo)
NCT06334848 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Efficacy of Mini Sling Versus Transobturator Tape in Surgical Management of Women With Stress Urinary Incontinence

TypeinterventionalSponsorAin Shams UniversityRan2024 to 2025Enrolled42ConditionsStress Urinary IncontinenceArmstransobturator tape
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 165 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. Pooled it
  5. Traditional suburethral sling operations for urinary incontinence in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  6. Laparoscopic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. What is the optimal length for single-incision tape?International urogynecology journal · 2019
    Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Arjun NambiarDepartment of Urology, Health Education North East/Freeman Hospital, Freeman Road, High Heaton, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Tyne and Wear, UK, NE7 7DN.
June D Cody
Stephen T Jeffery
Patricia Aluko
Cochrane · GBFreeman Hospital · GBNewcastle University · 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 USA have shown that up to 80% of these women have an element of stress urinary incontinence. This imposes significant health and economic burden on society and the women affected. 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: Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register (includes: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process) (searched 6 February 2013); ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP (searched 20 September 2012); reference lists. 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 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. 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.Types of single-incision slings included in this review: TVT-Secur (Gynecare); MiniArc (American Medical Systems, Minnetonka, USA); Ajust (CR Bard Inc., Covington, USA); Needleless (Mayumana Healthcare, Lisse, The Netherlands); Ophira (Promedon, Cordoba, Argentina); Tissue Fixation System (TFS PTY Ltd, Sydney, Australia) and CureMesh (DMed 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 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. A brief economic commentary (BEC) identified two studies which reported no difference in clinical outcomes between single-incision slings and transobturator mid-urethral slings, but single-incision slings may be more cost-effective than transobturator mid-urethral slings based on one-year follow-up. 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 SlingsFemaleHumansProsthesis FailureRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSafety-Based Medical Device WithdrawalsUrinary IncontinenceUrologic Surgical Procedures

Identifiers

PMID28746980
PMCPMC6483163
OpenAlexW1570528093

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.