ArticleInternational neurourology journal2018
Efficacy and Safety of Incontinence Surgery According to the Surgeon's Specialty and Performance of a Preoperative Urodynamic Study.
Article in International neurourology journal, 2018. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Second-Line Surgical Management After Midurethral Sling Failure.International neurourology journal · 2021Article
- Recent Trends in Transurethral Surgeries and Urological Outpatient Procedures: a Nationwide Population-based Cohort Study.Journal of Korean medical science · 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to analyze the efficacy and to estimate the complication rate of incontinence surgery accordingto the surgeon's specialty and whether a preoperative urodynamic study (UDS) was performed, using a nationally representative dataset.
methodsWe enrolled 356,155 women over 20 years old who had undergone surgery for stress urinary incontinence between 2006 and 2015. Patients were followed for up to 3 years to analyze the reoperation and complication rates. Data were obtained from the National Health Claims Database of the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) of Korea. Multiple Cox regression analysis was conducted to examine the efficacy and safety of incontinence surgery according to the surgeon's specialty and whether a preoperative UDS was performed.
resultsThe hazard ratio (HR) for reoperation was significantly higher for procedures performed by nonurologists than for procedures performed by urologists (HR, 1.174; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.103-1.249). Acute urinary retention, postoperative infections, procedure-associated pain, and other complications were also more common in procedures performed by nonurologists than in those performed by urologists. When stratified by whether a preoperative UDS was performed, the HR for reoperation according to the surgeon's specialty varied by performance of a preoperative UDS. While the reoperation rate was significantly higher in procedures performed by non-urologists when a preoperative UDS was performed (HR, 1.208; 95% CI, 1.122-1.3), there was no significant difference in the HRs for reoperation according to specialty when a preoperative UDS was not performed.
conclusionThis population-based study showed that the postoperative outcomes of incontinence surgery were dependent upon the surgeon's specialty and that the reoperation rate according to the surgeon's specialty varied based on whether a preoperative UDS was performed.
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.